Science & Tools of Learning & Memory | Dr. David Eagleman
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Oftentimes people will ask me, like an older person will say, "Hey, I do crossword puzzles.
人们常常会问我，就像老年人会说的那样，“嘿，我做填字游戏。
Is that good?" Yeah, it's good until you get good at it, and then stop and do something that you're not good at.
这样好吗？”是的，这很好，直到你擅长它，然后停下来做一些你不擅长的事情。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And constantly find the next thing that's a real challenge for you.
并不断寻找下一件对您来说真正具有挑战性的事情。
That's the key thing about plasticity.
这是可塑性的关键。
Your brain is locked in silence and darkness.
你的大脑被锁在寂静和黑暗中。
It's trying to make a model of the outside world.
它试图建立一个外部世界的模型。
And if you're constantly pushing and challenging it with things it doesn't understand, then it'll keep changing.
如果你不断地用它不理解的东西来推动和挑战它，那么它就会不断改变。
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.
欢迎来到胡伯曼实验室播客，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. David Eagleman.
今天我的嘉宾是大卫·伊格曼博士。
Dr. David Eagleman is a neuroscientist, a best-selling author, and a longtime science public educator.
大卫·伊格曼博士是一位神经科学家、畅销书作家和长期的科学公共教育家。
Today, we discuss several different features of brain science that impact your everyday life.
今天，我们讨论影响您日常生活的脑科学的几个不同特征。
And once you understand the mechanisms behind these features, it will position you to make better decisions, and if you choose, to rewire your brain to be a more effective learner.
一旦你了解了这些功能背后的机制，它将使你能够做出更好的决策，并且如果你愿意的话，可以重新连接你的大脑，成为一个更有效的学习者。
We start by discussing neuroplasticity, which is your brain's ability to change in response to experience or any form of deliberate learning that you are trying to impose on yourself.
我们首先讨论神经可塑性，这是你的大脑根据经验或你试图强加给自己的任何形式的刻意学习做出反应的能力。
We talk about the mechanisms for it and how you can get better at learning and unlearning in the context of skills and information.
我们讨论它的机制，以及如何在技能和信息的背景下更好地学习和忘却。
We also discuss memory formation and the relationship between stress and time perception, and why it is that people experience things in slow motion if those things are very stressful or traumatic, and how that can be useful for undoing traumatic memories.
我们还讨论了记忆的形成以及压力和时间感知之间的关系，以及为什么人们会以慢动作体验那些压力很大或创伤性的事情，以及这如何有助于消除创伤性记忆。
David also takes us through the neuroscience of cultural and political polarization, something that's very timely right now, false memories, déjà vu, dreams, and the meaning of dreams, and a lot more.
大卫还带我们了解了文化和政治两极分化的神经科学，这是现在非常及时的东西，错误的记忆，似曾相识的感觉，梦想，以及梦想的意义，等等。
David is an absolutely legendary science communicator.
大卫是一位绝对传奇的科学传播者。
I say this as a fellow neuroscientist.
我是作为一名神经科学家同事这么说的。
He is able to embed factual information about the brain into real-life stories, and in doing so, he's able to shed light on how we work as humans and how we can all improve our life experience.
他能够将有关大脑的事实信息嵌入到现实生活的故事中，通过这样做，他能够阐明我们作为人类如何工作以及我们如何改善我们的生活体验。
He's a true virtuoso of neuroscience and science education more generally.
他是神经科学和科学教育领域真正的大师。
What David shares with us today will change the way that you think about thinking and your own mind, and no doubt will also change the way that you view the world.
大卫今天与我们分享的内容将改变你思考的方式和你自己的想法，毫无疑问也将改变你看待世界的方式。
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, today's episode does include sponsors.
为了与这个主题保持一致，今天的节目确实有赞助商。
And now for my discussion with Dr. David Eagleman.
现在我与大卫·伊格曼博士进行了讨论。
Dr. David Eagleman, welcome.
大卫·伊格曼博士，欢迎光临。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Thanks.
谢谢。
Great to see you, Andrew.
很高兴见到你，安德鲁。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Man, I feel like the kid that was a freshman when you were a senior, because you got into this public-facing science education long before I did, and you've had an amazing career also in your laboratory work, and today I want to talk about all of it-
伙计，我感觉就像你是一名大四学生的孩子，因为你早在我之前就进入了面向公众的科学教育领域，而且你在实验室工作中也取得了令人惊叹的职业生涯，今天我想谈谈这一切——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Great
太棒了
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
by mostly listening and you doing the talking.
主要是听，然后自己说。
And there are so many topics in neuroscience that are fascinating, as you know, but I think perhaps the most fascinating thing about the human brain is its ability to change itself.
正如你所知，神经科学中有很多令人着迷的话题，但我认为人类大脑最令人着迷的地方也许是它改变自身的能力。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Plasticity.
可塑性。
So I know how I think about neuroplasticity.
所以我知道我如何看待神经可塑性。
I want to know how you think about neuroplasticity, what it is, and how we should think about it, and what we could possibly do with that information.
我想知道你如何看待神经可塑性，它是什么，我们应该如何思考它，以及我们可以利用这些信息做什么。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Okay, great.
好的，太好了。
This was Mother Nature's big trick with humans, was figuring out how to drop a creature into the world with a half-baked brain and then let the world wire up the rest of it.
这是大自然对人类的大把戏，它想办法把一个大脑半生不熟的生物扔到这个世界上，然后让世界把它的其余部分连接起来。
And so in 1953, Crick and Watson, I worked with Crick at the Salk, they burst into the Eagle and Child pub and said, "We've discovered the secret to life," because they figured out the structure of DNA.
1953 年，克里克和沃森，我和克里克在索尔克一起工作，他们冲进 Eagle and Child 酒吧说，“我们发现了生命的秘密”，因为他们弄清楚了 DNA 的结构。
But that was really half the secret of life, because the other half is all around us.
但这确实是生命秘密的一半，因为另一半就在我们周围。
It's every bit of experience that you have.
这是你所拥有的每一点经验。
It's your culture, it's your language, it's your neighborhood.
这是你的文化，这是你的语言，这是你的邻居。
All of that stuff gets absorbed by the brain and wires us up.
所有这些东西都会被大脑吸收并连接到我们身上。
And I often think about this issue of what if you were born 30,000 years ago, exactly your DNA, you pop out and you look around, and the question is, would you be you?
我经常思考这个问题，如果你出生在三万年前，你的DNA正是你的，你会跳出来，环顾四周，问题是，你会是你吗？
The answer is you wouldn't be.
答案是你不会。
You'd look maybe similar because of the same genetic blueprint, but you would have a different culture and a different language and different stories and all that stuff.
由于相同的基因蓝图，你们可能看起来很相似，但你们会有不同的文化、不同的语言、不同的故事等等。
You'd be a very different kind of person.
你会成为一个非常不同的人。
So brain plasticity, for anyone who doesn't know, it's that the brain is constantly reconfiguring itself every second of your life.
所以大脑的可塑性，对于任何不知道的人来说，就是大脑在你生命中的每一秒都在不断地重新配置自己。
You got 86 billion neurons, and really the way to think about it is these are like little creatures that are all crawling around and moving around.
你有 860 亿个神经元，真正的思考方式是，它们就像小生物一样，到处爬行和移动。
Each one is on average contacting 10,000 of its neighbors, but it's not like a fixed thing like you might see in a textbook.
每个节点平均会联系 10,000 个邻居，但这并不像你在教科书中看到的那样是固定的事情。
Instead, they're plugging and unplugging and searching around and finding new places to plug in, and of course, changing the strength of those connections.
相反，他们会插拔插头，四处搜索并寻找新的插入位置，当然，还会改变这些连接的强度。
And I actually always find this weird.
事实上我总是觉得这很奇怪。
It's like having all these little creatures in your head that are slithering around, but that's what makes us absorb every single thing in our worlds.
这就像你脑子里有所有这些小生物在滑行，但这就是让我们吸收世界中每件事物的原因。
And this is what humans have that other creatures have less of, and that's why we've taken over every corner of the Earth.
这就是人类拥有而其他生物所不具备的东西，这就是为什么我们占领了地球的每个角落。
That's why we've gotten off the planet.
这就是我们离开地球的原因。
We build skyscrapers and compose symphonies and so on, because each generation, we land, and we get to spend our first few years absorbing everything that's been discovered before us, and then we springboard off of that and do something new, because we are able to figure out all the discoveries that have come before us because of this ability to reconfigure our own circuitry.
我们建造摩天大楼、谱写交响乐等等，因为每一代人都会着陆，我们会在最初的几年里吸收在我们之前发现的一切，然后我们以此为跳板，做一些新的事情，因为我们能够弄清楚在我们之前的所有发现，因为我们有这种重新配置自己电路的能力。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And if you were an alligator born 30,000 years ago, you'd be the same alligator.
如果你是一条三万年前出生的鳄鱼，你也会是同一条鳄鱼。
Eat, mate, swim, whatever, and you wouldn't be meaningfully different.
吃饭、交配、游泳等等，你不会有太大的不同。
But humans, because of our flexibility, we are the dominant species.
但人类，由于我们的灵活性，我们是优势物种。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Such an interesting take on
如此有趣的做法
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
time in human evolution that, and I completely agree with you, I just had never thought about it this way before, that we land when we're born, and we're absorbing the outcroppings of all the neuroplasticity that came before us.
在人类进化过程中，我完全同意你的观点，我以前从未这样想过，我们出生时就着陆了，我们正在吸收我们之前出现的所有神经可塑性的外露。
We often hear that the human brain is kind of like a macaque monkey brain with a supercomputer added on top of it, mostly the prefrontal cortex.
我们经常听说人类的大脑有点像猕猴的大脑，上面加了一个超级计算机，主要是前额叶皮层。
A bit more prefrontal cortex.
前额皮质多一点。
Prefrontal cortex.
前额皮质。
Prefrontal cortex.
前额皮质。
Prefron- It's actually cortex in general.
Prefron——实际上是一般的皮质。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Interesting.
有趣。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Because we have four times as much cortex as our nearest neighbors in the animal kingdom, and that seems to be the magical stuff.
因为我们的皮质是动物王国中最近邻居的四倍，这似乎是神奇的东西。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Not just prefrontal cortex.
不仅仅是前额皮质。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
And I'm sure the listenership knows this, but the cortex is just the outer three millimeters of the brain.
我相信听众都知道这一点，但皮质只是大脑的外部三毫米。
It's that wrinkly bit, and that's the magic stuff because it turns out cortex is a one-trick pony.
就是那个起皱的部分，这就是神奇的东西，因为事实证明大脑皮层是一匹只会一招的小马。
The reason the cortex looks the same everywhere is because it is the same.
皮质之所以看起来到处都一样，是因为它是相同的。
It's got the same circuitry, it's got six little layers, it's doing the same algorithms, and it gets defined by what you plug into it.
它有相同的电路，有六个小层，执行相同的算法，并且由您插入的内容来定义。
So if you plug in a cable that's carrying visual information, then it becomes visual cortex.
因此，如果你插入一根携带视觉信息的电缆，那么它就会变成视觉皮层。
And we look at it and we say, "Oh, look, it detects the orientation of lines and it detects motion," things like that.
我们看着它，然后说，“哦，看，它检测线条的方向，它检测运动，”类似的事情。
If you plug auditory information into it, it becomes auditory cortex, and so on.
如果你将听觉信息插入其中，它就会变成听觉皮层，等等。
And it turns out, the way we do this in textbooks is we make a picture and we say, "Look, that's visual cortex, that's auditory, that's somatosensory." But all this stuff is really flexible.
事实证明，我们在教科书中这样做的方式是制作一张图片，然后我们说，“看，那是视觉皮层，那是听觉皮层，那是体感。”但所有这些东西都非常灵活。
It's so much more interesting than the textbook model because you can take the fibers and plug them in somewhere else.
它比教科书模型有趣得多，因为您可以将光纤插入其他地方。
So you may know this study in 2000 by Mriganka Sur at MIT, where he, in a ferret, took the visual information, the optic nerve, and he plugged it into the auditory cortex.
所以你可能知道 2000 年麻省理工学院的 Mriganka Sur 进行的这项研究，他在一只雪貂身上获取了视觉信息，即视神经，然后将其插入听觉皮层。
And then what would have been the auditory cortex became visually responsive, and it started caring about vision.
然后听觉皮层变得对视觉有反应，并开始关心视觉。
So what does that mean?
那么这意味着什么呢？
It means the cortex is a one-trick pony, and we got so much more of it, including the prefrontal cortex.
这意味着大脑皮层是一匹只会一招的小马，而我们的大脑皮层还有很多，包括前额叶皮层。
So that has two major effects.
这有两个主要影响。
One is that there's a lot more room with our species in between input and output.
一是我们的物种在输入和输出之间有更多的空间。
So with a squirrel or a cat or even a macaque monkey, you throw some food in front of it, that sensory cortex is right next to the motor cortex, it's going to eat the thing.
因此，对于松鼠、猫甚至猕猴，你在它面前扔一些食物，感觉皮层就在运动皮层旁边，它就会吃掉这些东西。
But we've got all this computational real estate in between in and out.
但我们在进出之间拥有所有这些计算资源。
So we can say, "Well, I'm on a diet, I'm trying," whatever, "I'll eat it later." We've got all these other options that we can take.
所以我们可以说，“好吧，我正在节食，我正在努力”，无论如何，“我稍后再吃。”我们还有所有其他可以采取的选择。
That's one thing, and then the other thing is exactly what you pointed to, which is the prefrontal cortex, which allows us to simulate what ifs.
这是一回事，然后另一件事正是你所指的，即前额叶皮层，它使我们能够模拟假设。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Allows us to think about possible futures, simulate things in a way that we don't have to risk our lives doing it.
让我们思考可能的未来，以一种我们不必冒生命危险的方式模拟事物。
We can simulate it and say, "Oh, that would be a bad idea.
我们可以模拟它并说：“哦，那是个坏主意。
Oh, that'd be a pretty good idea." And then we can take the action.
哦，那是个好主意。”然后我们就可以采取行动了。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
A couple different questions.
有几个不同的问题。
I'm a big fan of Mriganka's work, and I'm so glad you mentioned that work.
我是 Mriganka 作品的忠实粉丝，我很高兴你提到那项作品。
It really points to the fact that while there are cortical areas that are genetically devoted by virtue of wiring when we arrive in the world, to auditory or visual, that there's a lot of crossover, especially in the extreme cases.
它确实指出了这样一个事实：虽然当我们到达这个世界时，某些皮质区域在基因上是专门用于听觉或视觉的，但存在很多交叉，特别是在极端情况下。
So my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, is that if somebody is blind from birth, the real estate that would be allocated to vision becomes allocated to tactile sensation, especially if they learn how to Braille read, maybe auditory processing, because they rely on it more.
所以我的理解，如果我错了，请纠正我，如果一个人从出生起就失明，那么分配给视觉的空间就会分配给触觉，特别是如果他们学习如何盲文阅读，也许是听觉处理，因为他们更依赖它。
So there's really no blank real estate in the cortex.
所以大脑皮层中确实没有空白区域。
It's all used.
都用过了。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That is exactly right.
这是完全正确的。
So it turns out people who are born blind, what we call the visual cortex at the back of the head here, that gets taken over.
事实证明，天生失明的人，即我们所说的位于后脑勺的视觉皮层，会被接管。
It's no longer visual.
它不再是视觉的。
It becomes devoted to hearing, to touch, to memory, things like this.
它变得专注于听觉、触觉、记忆等诸如此类的事情。
And you can demonstrate that people who are born blind are better at hearing and at touch and so on.
你可以证明，先天失明的人在听觉和触觉等方面都更擅长。
They can discriminate things much more finely.
他们可以更精细地辨别事物。
Same with people who go deaf.
聋哑人也是如此。
The auditory cortex, all that real estate, nothing lies fallow in the brain.
听觉皮层，所有这些不动产，大脑中没有任何东西闲置。
All that gets taken over for different tasks, and they can do things like see your accent.
所有这些都会被接管以执行不同的任务，并且他们可以做一些事情，例如查看你的口音。
Just by lip reading, they can tell where in the country you're from, and so on.
只需通过唇读，他们就能知道你来自这个国家的哪个地方，等等。
All of this demonstrates that, first of all, the more real estate you have, the better.
所有这些都表明，首先，你拥有的房地产越多越好。
We are, in a sense, if you've got all your senses, you have to share everything.
从某种意义上说，我们是，如果你有所有的感官，你就必须分享一切。
And so we're pretty good at vision and hearing and touch and so on, but everything has to get shared.
因此，我们非常擅长视觉、听觉和触觉等，但一切都必须共享。
But there are pretty extraordinary things that happen when people devote more real estate towards one task.
但当人们将更多的时间投入到一项任务上时，就会发生一些非同寻常的事情。
And by the way, just as a side note, this is one hypothesis about what goes on with savantism in autism, is that somebody, for whatever genetic set of reasons, ends up devoting a ton of real estate to, let's say, the Rubik's Cube or the piano or memorizing visual scenes or something, and then they are absolutely superhuman at it.
顺便说一句，就像旁注一样，这是关于自闭症中学者主义的一个假设，即某人，无论出于何种遗传原因，最终将大量的时间投入到魔方或钢琴或记忆视觉场景或其他东西上，然后他们在这方面绝对是超人。
That comes at the cost of other things, let's say social skills that might be needed.
这是以其他事情为代价的，比如说可能需要的社交技能。
But the general story is if you devote a lot of real estate towards something, you're going to get really good at it.
但总体来说，如果你在某件事上投入了大量的精力，你就会非常擅长它。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I'm excited to share with you that Mateína, the yerba mate drink that I helped create, is now available at Sprouts market nationwide.
我很高兴与大家分享，我帮助创造的马黛茶饮料 Mateína 现已在全国 Sprouts 市场上市。
Longtime listeners of the Huberman Lab podcast know that yerba mate is my preferred caffeine source.
胡伯曼实验室播客的长期听众都知道马黛茶是我最喜欢的咖啡因来源。
It provides a smooth energy lift without giving you the jitters, and it has many other benefits, such as helping regulate blood sugar, improving digestion, mild appetite suppression, and more.
它可以平稳地提升能量，不会让您感到紧张，而且还有许多其他好处，例如帮助调节血糖、改善消化、轻度抑制食欲等等。
Mateína is my absolute favorite of all the yerba mate brands out there, and believe me, I've tried them all.
在所有马黛茶品牌中，Mateína 绝对是我的最爱，相信我，我已经尝试过所有品牌。
The flavors are fantastic.
味道棒极了。
I drink at least three cans of Mateína every single day.
我每天至少喝三罐 Mateína。
You'll often see them on the table during our podcast recordings.
在我们的播客录制过程中，您经常会在桌子上看到它们。
I absolutely love the product, and I'm proud to now have it sold at Sprouts market.
我非常喜欢这个产品，我很自豪现在它在豆芽市场上出售。
Also, there's a great new offer.
此外，还有一个很棒的新优惠。
They are giving away a free can of Mateína to anyone who buys it at Sprouts and sends in a photo of their receipt.
他们向在 Sprouts 购买并发送收据照片的任何人免费赠送一罐 Mateína。
To learn more about how you can get a free can of Mateína, go to drinkmateina.com/offer.
要了解有关如何免费获得一罐 Mateína 的更多信息，请访问 Drinkmateina.com/offer。
Again, that's drinkmateina.com/offer to get a can of Mateína for free at your local Sprouts market.
再次强调，您可以通过 Drinkmateina.com/offer 在当地的豆芽市场免费购买一罐 Mateína。
Today's episode is also brought to us by RORA.
今天的节目也是RORA给我们带来的。
RORA makes what I believe are the best water filters on the market.
我认为 RORA 制造的是市场上最好的滤水器。
It's an unfortunate reality, but tap water often contains contaminants that negatively impact our health.
这是一个不幸的现实，但自来水通常含有对我们的健康产生负面影响的污染物。
In fact, a 2020 study by the Environmental Working Group estimated that more than 200 million Americans are exposed to PFAS chemicals, also known as forever chemicals, through drinking of tap water.
事实上，环境工作组 2020 年的一项研究估计，超过 2 亿美国人通过饮用自来水接触到 PFAS 化学物质（也称为永久化学物质）。
These forever chemicals are linked to serious health issues, such as hormone disruption, gut microbiome disruption, fertility issues, and many other health problems.
这些永久性化学物质与严重的健康问题有关，例如激素紊乱、肠道微生物群破坏、生育问题和许多其他健康问题。
The Environmental Working Group has also shown that over 122 million Americans drink tap water with high levels of chemicals known to cause cancer.
环境工作组还表明，超过 1.22 亿美国人饮用的自来水含有大量已知致癌化学物质。
It's for all these reasons that I'm thrilled to have Rorra as a sponsor of this podcast.
出于所有这些原因，我很高兴 Rorra 作为这个播客的赞助商。
I've been using the Rorra countertop system for almost a year now.
我使用 Rorra 台面系统已经快一年了。
Rorra's filtration technology removes harmful substances, including endocrine disruptors and disinfection byproducts, while preserving beneficial minerals like magnesium and calcium.
Rorra 的过滤技术可去除有害物质，包括内分泌干扰物和消毒副产物，同时保留镁和钙等有益矿物质。
It requires no installation or plumbing, it's built from medical-grade stainless steel, and its sleek design fits beautifully on your countertop.
它不需要安装或管道，由医用级不锈钢制成，其时尚的设计非常适合您的台面。
In fact, I consider it a welcome addition to my kitchen.
事实上，我认为它对我的厨房来说是一个受欢迎的补充。
It looks great, and the water is delicious.
看起来很棒，水也很美味。
If you'd like to try Rorra, you can go to rorra.com/huberman and get an exclusive discount.
如果您想尝试 Rorra，可以访问 rorra.com/huberman 并获得独家折扣。
Again, that's Rorra.
再说一遍，那是罗拉。
R-O-R-R-A.com/huberman.
R-O-R-R-A.com/huberman。
I don't know if you saw this study that was published in "Science" recently that explored early specialization in sport or creative endeavor versus kids that played a bunch of different sports or involved in a bunch of different creative endeavors.
我不知道你是否看过最近发表在《科学》上的这项研究，该研究探讨了体育或创造性活动的早期专业化与参加一系列不同运动或参与一堆不同创造性活动的孩子的关系。
And it turns out that specializing too early, on average, doesn't play out so well in terms of peak of success later.
事实证明，平均而言，过早专业化对于以后的成功顶峰来说并没有那么好。
Now, there are exceptions, right?
现在，也有例外，对吗？
But it turns out that being a bit more diversified in your physical activities and cognitive activities as a young person, into the early teens even and beyond, is more beneficial.
但事实证明，作为一个年轻人，甚至十几岁甚至更久，身体活动和认知活动更加多样化是更有益的。
And this, to me, kind of runs counter to my images of Tiger Woods putting golf balls with his dad when he was kind of still waddling, he was so little, right?
对我来说，这有点违背了我对泰格·伍兹与他父亲一起打高尔夫球的印象，当时他还摇摇晃晃，他太小了，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And then he becomes Tiger Woods.
然后他就变成了泰格·伍兹。
Or the Williams sisters, who were intense early on.
或者是威廉姆斯姐妹，她们一开始就很热情。
I think that especially in the United States, we have this notion that early specialization is really what sets you up to be spectacularly good later.
我认为，尤其是在美国，我们有这样一种观念，即早期的专业化确实能让你在以后变得非常出色。
So I'm curious what your general thoughts are for every person.
所以我很好奇你对每个人的总体想法是什么。
You have kids, and some of us still are kids who are listening, and we all have plasticity into adulthood.
你有孩子，我们中的一些人仍然是正在倾听的孩子，而且我们都有可塑性进入成年期。
Do you think that we come into the world with some genetic leanings toward particular activities being right for us or more right for us?
你认为我们来到这个世界上时，是否带有一些基因倾向，倾向于某些特定的活动适合我们或更适合我们？
And how do you think about it in terms of how many difficult, hard-to-access things we do just so that we're sure that we have a full experience of life?
您如何看待我们做了多少困难、难以接近的事情，只是为了确保我们拥有完整的生活体验？
Because what I hear you saying, and I totally subscribe to, is that our early experience becomes the funnel through which we have more or less opportunity later.
因为我听到你所说的，并且我完全同意，我们早期的经历成为了我们以后或多或少有机会的漏斗。
Like the kind of width of the funnel depends on how many things we did or didn't do early on.
就像漏斗的宽度取决于我们早期做了或没有做多少事情。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So this is really interesting because, first of all, take somebody like the Williams sisters.
所以这真的很有趣，因为首先，以威廉姆斯姐妹这样的人为例。
They got drilled on tennis from day one, and this stuff can be taught, and this is why they became champions.
他们从第一天起就接受了网球训练，这些东西是可以教的，这就是他们成为冠军的原因。
And this is obvious, but this is the same way you find with chess champions and golf champions like Woods and so on.
这是显而易见的，但这与你在国际象棋冠军和高尔夫冠军（如伍兹等）身上发现的方式相同。
You have to really spend the time doing it.
你必须真正花时间去做这件事。
Now, I find this interesting for a few reasons.
现在，我发现这很有趣，原因有几个。
One is that cognitively, you can understand what a forehand or a backhand is, a hit in tennis, but to actually get good at it, you have to burn it down into the circuitry.
一是在认知上，你可以理解什么是正手或反手，网球中的击球，但要真正擅长它，你必须将其烧录到电路中。
So actually, let me back up for one second, which is the reason that we have brain plasticity is because this is how a brain makes things that you do fast and efficient.
事实上，让我退一步，这就是我们大脑具有可塑性的原因，因为这就是大脑如何让你快速高效地做事情的方式。
So when you're doing a task a lot, like serving tennis or something, you're taking that from the software to the hardware of the brain.
因此，当你经常执行一项任务时，例如打网球或其他什么，你会将其从软件转移到大脑的硬件中。
Let's say I'm an amateur tennis player and there's Serena Williams, I'm playing against her.
假设我是一名业余网球运动员，有塞雷娜·威廉姆斯，我正在与她比赛。
It turns out, surprisingly, when we're playing, she's beating me like crazy, but my brain's the one using all the activity.
令人惊讶的是，当我们玩耍时，她疯狂地殴打我，但我的大脑却在使用所有的活动。
I'm the one burning all the calories with my brain.
我是那个用我的大脑燃烧所有卡路里的人。
Why?
为什么？
Because she has burned tennis into the hardware of the brain, so it's fast and efficient.
因为她把网球烧进了大脑的硬件，所以它又快又高效。
I, on the other hand, am trying to simulate lots of things and figure out where I should go and all that.
另一方面，我正在尝试模拟很多事情并弄清楚我应该去哪里等等。
So the brain does this for reasons of efficiency.
所以大脑这样做是出于效率的考虑。
Obviously, the brain's main job is to save energy because we are mobile creatures who run on batteries, and so this is one of the big things about plasticity.
显然，大脑的主要工作是节省能量，因为我们是靠电池运行的移动生物，所以这是可塑性的重要意义之一。
So people get extraordinarily good by doing things over and over.
因此，人们通过一遍又一遍地做事情而变得非常优秀。
These three women, the Polgar sisters, who are chess champions, they're the best, to my knowledge, are still the best three female chess players in the world.
这三位女性，波尔加姐妹，是国际象棋冠军，据我所知，她们是最好的，仍然是世界上最好的三位女棋手。
Their father from day one started teaching them how to do chess and so on, and they all became world champions at this.
他们的父亲从第一天起就开始教他们如何下棋等，他们都成为了世界冠军。
The thing about whether you need to have diversification, that's an interesting question.
关于是否需要多元化，这是一个有趣的问题。
I can see why it would be useful because you're learning different ways, different moves about it in the same way that if you learn how to snowboard and ski, you might get better at both of them.
我可以理解为什么它会很有用，因为你正在学习不同的方式、不同的动作，就像如果你学习如何滑雪板和滑雪一样，你可能会在这两个方面都做得更好。
But I got to say, when children grow up, let's say, trilingually, or even bilingually, they end up having a lower vocabulary in both languages than if they grow up monolingually.
但我不得不说，当孩子长大后，比方说，在三语甚至双语中长大，他们在两种语言中的词汇量最终会比他们在单语中长大时要少。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Really?
真的吗？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
It's just because of the amount of practice you get with a language.
这只是因为你对一门语言进行的练习量。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Kids, still do your second language homework.
孩子们，还是做第二语言作业吧。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Right.
正确的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
In California, growing up here, it's very useful to know English and some Spanish.
在加利福尼亚州长大，了解英语和一些西班牙语非常有用。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Very, very useful.
非常非常有用。
In fact, I wish I'd gotten better at Spanish when I was a kid.
事实上，我希望我小时候西班牙语就学得更好。
And my father's born and raised in Buenos Aires.
我父亲在布宜诺斯艾利斯出生和长大。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah, cool.
是的，很酷。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But we didn't speak Spanish at home, at least not very much.
但我们在家里不会说西班牙语，至少不会说太多。
So I can tell you, learn a musical instrument and learn a second language.
所以我可以告诉你，学乐器就是学第二语言。
The musical instrument for your own enrichment-
丰富自己的乐器-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right
右
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and those around you.
和你周围的人。
But the second language thing I think is extremely useful, at least in California I find it to be really useful.
但我认为第二语言的东西非常有用，至少在加州我发现它真的很有用。
But you're saying that-
但你是说——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
A lot of kids are resisting this, by the way, now, because they say, "Look, I can do Google Translate or my Meta sunglasses," and so they're resisting it.
顺便说一句，现在很多孩子都在抵制这一点，因为他们说，“看，我可以做谷歌翻译或我的元太阳镜，”所以他们正在抵制它。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah, but Google Translate is not Google Relate.
是的，但 Google Translate 不是 Google Relate。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I totally agree.
我完全同意。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I'm hardly fluent, but I can get by now.
我不太流利，但现在我可以了。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I'm pretty good.
我很好。
I've been practicing my Spanish more and more, and just by virtue of living in Southern California, that just happens.
我越来越多地练习西班牙语，仅仅因为住在南加州，这种情况就发生了。
But I think knowing a second language, and being able to have that kind of face-to-face conversation with someone, even the struggle of it ...
但我认为了解第二语言，并能够与某人进行面对面的对话，即使是其中的挣扎......
is enriching in a way, because you're forcing your brain to do some work.
在某种程度上是丰富的，因为你强迫你的大脑做一些工作。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
My father spoke eight languages fluently without accent.
我父亲能流利地说八种语言，没有口音。
And that's because he went to medical school in Europe and did his clinical rotations in different countries, and he was a young man, so everywhere he went, he got a girlfriend, and then he had the incentive to learn the language.
那是因为他去了欧洲的医学院，在不同的国家进行了临床轮转，而且他是个年轻人，所以无论他走到哪里，他都有女朋友，然后他就有了学习语言的动力。
And by the way, maybe we'll come to this, but when it comes to brain plasticity, the reward systems are a big part of what makes change happen in the brain.
顺便说一句，也许我们会谈到这一点，但当谈到大脑可塑性时，奖励系统是大脑发生变化的重要组成部分。
Actually, let me just mention, this is tangential, but let me just mention this while it's on my mind.
事实上，让我提一下，这是离题的，但让我在我想到这一点时提一下。
A lot of people really for the last 30 years, ever since the internet became a big thing, really worried about what this is going to mean for kids and education.
自从互联网成为一件大事以来，在过去的 30 年里，很多人都非常担心这对孩子和教育意味着什么。
I think it's terrific.
我认为这太棒了。
I am very optimistic about this because what kids started getting a few decades ago was this opportunity to learn about something right when they were curious about it.
我对此非常乐观，因为孩子们在几十年前就开始得到这样的机会，当他们好奇的时候，他们就有机会正确地了解某件事。
So they want to know how to fix their bicycle tire, or what is this space physics thing or whatever, and they ask the question and get the answer.
所以他们想知道如何修理自行车轮胎，或者这个空间物理学是什么或其他什么，他们提出问题并得到答案。
Why does that matter?
为什么这很重要？
It's because brain plasticity really happens when you have the right cocktail of neurotransmitters present.
这是因为当你有正确的神经递质混合物时，大脑可塑性确实会发生。
And that cocktail happens to map onto curiosity or engagement.
这种鸡尾酒恰好映射了好奇心或参与度。
I'm slightly older than you are, but when we were in school, the teacher teaches you the thing.
我比你大一点，但是我们上学的时候，老师就教过你这个东西。
They just dump everything like, "Oh, the Battle of Hastings happened in 1066," and you may or may not ever need to know that.
他们只是抛弃一切，比如“哦，黑斯廷斯战役发生在 1066 年”，你可能需要也可能不需要知道这一点。
But what kids get now is information right in the context of their curiosity, and that makes a big difference because stuff really sticks.
但孩子们现在得到的是在他们好奇心的背景下的信息，这会带来很大的不同，因为东西真的很粘。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And I have been extraordinarily impressed with young people that I meet.
我遇到的年轻人给我留下了极其深刻的印象。
I meet all these young people who say these extraordinary things, and I say, "Wow, how did you know that?" And they've watched TED Talks, they've asked Alexa, they've talked to ChatGPT, and they get the information, and it sticks.
我遇到了所有这些年轻人，他们都说了这些非同寻常的事情，我说：“哇，你怎么知道的？”他们观看了 TED 演讲，询问了 Alexa，与 ChatGPT 交谈过，他们获得了信息，并且这些信息会被保留下来。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Super interesting.
超级有趣。
I hadn't thought about it that way.
我没有这样想过。
I guess I'm reflecting my age to everyone when I say that I remember being interested in something and then having to bike or skateboard down to Tower Books-
当我说我记得对某件事感兴趣，然后不得不骑自行车或滑板去塔楼书店时，我想我是在向每个人反映我的年龄——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
or go to the library and look things up, and I tell myself that the effort involved in going to get it actually is useful.
或者去图书馆查资料，我告诉自己，为获取它而付出的努力实际上是有用的。
But you're right.
但你是对的。
Had I been able to look up what I was interested in and get it right then, I probably would've spent more time implementing the information because I was interested in all sorts of things that usually involved building something or doing something that was going to make a big mess and frustrate my parents, right?
如果我能够查找我感兴趣的内容并正确理解它，我可能会花更多的时间来实现这些信息，因为我对各种通常涉及构建某些东西或做一些会造成大混乱并使我的父母感到沮丧的事情感兴趣，对吗？
But I spent a lot of time searching for the information.
但我花了很多时间寻找信息。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Plus, you remember how dinner table conversations used to go, which is that everyone argues about something, and then someone says, "Well, I think it's this," and the other person says, "No, I think it's that." And then it just sort of stops there because no one knows the right answer.
另外，你还记得餐桌上的谈话是如何进行的，每个人都会争论某件事，然后有人说，“嗯，我认为是这个，”另一个人说，“不，我认为是那个。”然后事情就到此为止了，因为没有人知道正确的答案。
But now everyone whips out their phone, gets the answer, and then it keeps going, which is really terrific.
但现在每个人都拿出手机，得到答案，然后继续进行，这真是太棒了。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
It's dissolved some of the social dominance that-
它消除了一些社会统治地位——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
comes about when one person's word is the word that everyone has to just kind of believe, just because they say it with more certainty than the other do.
当一个人的话语是每个人都必须相信的话语时，就会出现这种情况，只是因为他们说的比另一个人更确定。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
They're the father or whatever.
他们是父亲或其他什么。
Exactly.
确切地。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Or the grandfather or whoever.
或者祖父或任何人。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Or the grandmother in some cases.
或者在某些情况下是祖母。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Who knows?
谁知道？
Now it gets checked against the internet and Claude for me, or ChatGPT for a lot of other people.
现在，对我来说，它会通过互联网和 Claude 进行检查，对于很多其他人来说，它会通过 ChatGPT 进行检查。
I realize that the question I'm about to ask can't be answered completely, but given what you know about plasticity and the fact that, yes, we come into the world with some pre-programming of our brain circuitry, but we have some control over what the inputs are.
我意识到我要问的问题无法完全回答，但考虑到你对可塑性的了解，以及我们来到这个世界时对大脑电路进行了一些预编程的事实，但我们对输入内容有一定的控制权。
Some.
一些。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Hmm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Depending on our circumstances.
取决于我们的情况。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
It depends what you mean by we.
这取决于你所说的我们是什么意思。
So as infants, of course, we have no control over that.
当然，作为婴儿，我们无法控制这一点。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Right.
对。
As an adolescent, as a teen-
作为一个青少年，作为一个青少年——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Fair
公平
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
as a 20-year-old-
作为一个20岁的人——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes
是的
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
assuming plasticity extends into adulthood, still as adults, although it's harder.
假设可塑性延伸到成年期，仍然是成年人，尽管这更难。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Quite right.
完全正确。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Some control over what one learns or does.
对一个人所学或所做的事有一定的控制权。
What do you think are sort of the core elements to making sure you build a healthy, well-rounded nervous system?
您认为确保建立健康、全面的神经系统的核心要素是什么？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Nobody's really ever attempted to answer this question.
没有人真正尝试过回答这个问题。
A howler monkey learns all the things that a howler monkey needs to do.
吼猴会学习吼猴需要做的所有事情。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Humans, we have, as you said, the benefit of all the technology that comes from the plasticity of those that came before us.
人类，正如您所说，所有技术的好处都来自于我们之前的技术的可塑性。
And so maybe kids don't need to learn a second language, but what do you think are sort of the essentials?
所以也许孩子不需要学习第二语言，但你认为什么是必需的？
Obviously, learning to communicate and understand, learning to move.
显然，学习沟通和理解，学习移动。
But do we have some sense of how you check off the core 10 boxes of neuroplasticity to make sure that by time you land in adulthood, or even if you're still an adult, that you're doing the, quote unquote, "best that you can with your brain"?
但是，我们是否知道如何检查神经可塑性的 10 个核心框，以确保当您成年时，或者即使您仍然是成年人，您正在做，引用不引用，“用你的大脑尽最大努力”？
This is a tough question, I realize.
我意识到这是一个很难回答的问题。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I would say two things.
我想说两件事。
One is try to maximize along every axis.
一是尝试沿每个轴最大化。
So try to be an athlete, try to be a scholar, try to be somebody who's good at social life and has a lot of friends.
所以，努力成为一名运动员，努力成为一名学者，努力成为一个擅长社交生活并拥有很多朋友的人。
All of these axes of life, it's worth spending the time doing that, and obviously we're in an era, especially now, where there are a million ways to waste time.
所有这些生活轴心，值得花时间去做这些，显然我们正处于一个时代，尤其是现在，有一百万种方式可以浪费时间。
I sit on airplanes next to people and they're playing Candy Crush for the whole flight, and I just feel like, what a shame, because there's so much you could be putting into your brain and making happen.
我坐在飞机上，旁边有人，他们在整个飞行过程中都在玩《Candy Crush》，我只是觉得，真是太遗憾了，因为有太多东西可以放进你的大脑并实现。
You could be reading books, you could be listening to podcasts, anything like that.
你可以看书，你可以听播客，诸如此类。
Okay, so there's that.
好的，就是这样。
But the other half that I would say is a lot of what we care to be depends a lot on what's going on in the future, and I'm fascinated by, for children now in schools, what choices they should make.
但我想说的另一半是，我们想要成为什么样的人，很大程度上取决于未来会发生什么，对于现在在学校的孩子们来说，他们应该做出什么选择，这让我着迷。
Because who the heck knows what careers are going to exist in 20 or 30 years from now?
因为谁知道 20 或 30 年后将会存在什么职业呢？
Therefore, the main things they can concentrate on, I think, are critical thinking and creativity.
因此，我认为他们可以集中精力的主要是批判性思维和创造力。
Those are the main things for them to figure out how to do.
这些是他们要弄清楚如何做的主要事情。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
What are some good ways, in your opinion, to access critical thinking and creativity?
您认为获得批判性思维和创造力的好方法有哪些？
I can imagine a number of them.
我可以想象其中的一些。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Here's something I find very optimistic about AI in the realm of education.
我对人工智能在教育领域的应用非常乐观。
In any classroom, it's going too fast for half the kids and too slow for the other half of the kids.
在任何教室里，对于一半的孩子来说速度太快，而对于另一半的孩子来说速度太慢。
What we now have the opportunity for is really individualized education.
我们现在有机会接受真正的个性化教育。
One way this could be implemented is AI debate.
实现这一目标的一种方法是人工智能辩论。
So you take any hot-button issue, abortion, gun control, whatever you want, and you debate with the AI, and you get graded based on the quality of your arguments.
所以你可以提出任何热点问题，堕胎、枪支管制，无论你想要什么，你都可以与人工智能进行辩论，然后根据你的论点质量对你进行评分。
And then you switch sides, and you take the other side, and you argue again.
然后你们交换立场，站在另一方，然后再次争论。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Hmm.
嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
This is the kind of thing you could never have enough teachers for, they would never have enough patience for.
对于这种事情，你永远不会有足够的老师，他们永远不会有足够的耐心。
AI is terrific at this.
AI 在这方面非常出色。
And by the way, it's really important so that students get a 360 view of issues instead of ideological capture.
顺便说一句，让学生获得对问题的 360 度视角而不是意识形态捕捉非常重要。
So this is a terrific way to teach critical thinking to every student, not just the kids on the speech and debate team.
因此，这是向每个学生（而不仅仅是演讲和辩论队的孩子）教授批判性思维的绝佳方式。
Okay, creativity, that's easy.
好吧，创造力，这很容易。
That has to do with learning the foundational stuff and then doing remixes, bending, breaking, blending, doing new versions of it.
这与学习基础知识有关，然后进行混音、弯曲、破坏、混合、制作新版本。
And I think schools can implement this easily and without any extra expense, which is you have to teach the foundational stuff.
我认为学校可以很容易地实现这一点，而且不需要任何额外的费用，也就是说你必须教授基础知识。
But you compress that so you have one extra week at the end of each semester, and then that last week you say, "Okay, great, take everything you've learned and now make your own thing with it.
但是你压缩了它，这样你在每个学期结束时就有额外的一周时间，然后在最后一周你说，“好吧，太好了，利用你所学到的一切，现在用它来做你自己的事情。
Using all the elements that we've learned, bend it, break it, blend it, make your own version of this."
使用我们学到的所有元素，弯曲它、打破它、混合它，制作你自己的版本。”
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That kind of exercise, that is creativity.
这种练习，就是创造力。
That's all creativity is, is taking your storehouse of knowledge and doing remixes.
这就是创造力的全部，就是利用你的知识库并进行混音。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Hmm.
嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
We should be teaching that.
我们应该这样教导。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So critical thinking and creativity.
所以批判性思维和创造力。
Goethe, the German philosopher, had said, "There are two bequests that a parent can give a child.
德国哲学家歌德曾说过：“父母可以给孩子留下两份遗赠。
One is roots and one is wings." And my interpretation of that has always been critical thinking and creativity.
一是根，一是翼。”我对此的解释一直是批判性思维和创造力。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Love that.
喜欢那个。
And thank you for making it practical.
感谢您让它变得实用。
That's something I think any and all of us could invest some more time in.
我认为我们所有人都可以在这方面投入更多时间。
I also agree it's very easy to waste time on the internet.
我也同意在互联网上浪费时间很容易。
I have a separate phone for social media.
我有一部单独的社交媒体手机。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Oh, great.
哦，太好了。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
That solved a lot of issues.
这解决了很多问题。
Not that it was really contaminating my life that much.
并不是说它真的严重污染了我的生活。
I like social media.
我喜欢社交媒体。
I like teaching and learning there and some entertainment there.
我喜欢在那里教学和学习以及那里的一些娱乐活动。
But by putting it on an old phone, so X and Instagram are just on that phone.
但如果把它放在旧手机上，那么 X 和 Instagram 就只能在旧手机上了。
People send me things by text.
人们通过短信向我发送东西。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And I have to transfer them over.
我必须把它们转移过来。
Sometimes I see them, sometimes I don't.
有时我看到它们，有时却看不到。
My default setting is no longer to just look at my phone and look at social media.
我的默认设置不再是只看手机和社交媒体。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It has increased my productivity and just my happiness and my level of attention.
它提高了我的生产力、我的幸福感和我的注意力水平。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Also, when I do social media, I'm doing it like a-
另外，当我使用社交媒体时，我会像-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Purposeful thing
有目的的事情
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
like watching a show or doing something that I would devote time for, as to not always just scrolling in the background.
就像看节目或做一些我会花时间做的事情，而不是总是只是在后台滚动。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Do you find yourself picking up that phone sometimes accidentally?
您有时会不小心拿起电话吗？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
No, and if I do, if I find myself doing that reflexively, I have what I call a supermax prison lockbox, which you can't code out of.
不，如果我这样做了，如果我发现自己本能地这样做，我就拥有了一个我所说的超级监狱密码箱，你无法在其中编码。
And the fun for me, and get this, this is really weird, I don't know what this says about my psychology.
对我来说很有趣，明白了，这真的很奇怪，我不知道这说明了我的心理。
I'll put it in there, and I'll dial in like four hours.
我会把它放在那里，然后我会在大约四个小时内拨通。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And then I hit the supermax button, and then there's this 15-second countdown, and then I'll go, "Five, six, seven, eight, nine hours." Then I go, "Okay, cool, like nine hours." So there's this weird thing where you don't want to let it go.
然后我按下超级按钮，然后有 15 秒倒计时，然后我会说“五、六、七、八、九小时。”然后我说：“好吧，很酷，大约九个小时。”所以这很奇怪，你不想放手。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But then I really enjoy the freedom from it so much-
但我真的很享受摆脱它的自由-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes
是的
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
that the extra hours that I add on and that last thing, it feels like a gift to myself.
我增加的额外时间以及最后一件事，感觉就像是给自己的一份礼物。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And then I'm like, "I'm going to have a great day." And then when I get back on it, certainly there's this dopamine dynamics thing where you go, "Oh, this is a lot of fun," but you have to be super careful because it'll suck you in.
然后我想，“我将会度过美好的一天。”然后当我回过头来时，肯定会有多巴胺动力学的东西，你会说，“哦，这很有趣，”但你必须非常小心，因为它会把你吸进去。
I'm just amazed at how fast time goes, which we're going to talk about time perception.
我只是惊讶于时间过得如此之快，我们将讨论时间感知。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Hmm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Before we do that, though, I have a question about plasticity that I've been waiting to ask you and only you, because we have a lot of friends that are neuroscientists, but I have a feeling you've thought about this more than anyone, which is, are there any things that we can do to extend the window of plasticity?
不过，在我们这样做之前，我有一个关于可塑性的问题，我一直在等着问你，而且只有你，因为我们有很多神经科学家朋友，但我有一种感觉，你比任何人都更多地思考这个问题，也就是说，我们可以做些什么来延长可塑性的窗口吗？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Hmm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Or are there activities like learning an instrument or some sort of game, who knows, that gives us our capacity for plasticity, more height, more width?
或者有没有像学习乐器或某种游戏之类的活动，谁知道呢，这些活动可以赋予我们可塑性、更高的高度、更宽的能力？
As opposed to just the same principles.
与同样的原则相反。
You need to focus on the thing, then you need to make errors, then you need to do some error correction, you get to sleep that night, you rewire, you keep trial and error.
你需要专注于事情，然后你需要犯错误，然后你需要做一些错误纠正，你那天晚上睡觉，你重新布线，你不断尝试和错误。
We know the basics now.
我们现在知道了基础知识。
I think most people have heard them.
我想大多数人都听过。
But what can we do to broaden our ability or heighten our ability to get plasticity?
但是我们可以做些什么来扩大我们的能力或提高我们获得可塑性的能力呢？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Two words, seek novelty.
两个字，求新。
That's the whole game, is you got to continually challenge the brain, and this is something that as we get older, it's more important than ever.
这就是整个游戏，你必须不断挑战大脑，随着我们年龄的增长，这比以往任何时候都更加重要。
It's finding new things that we haven't done before.
它正在寻找我们以前没有做过的新事物。
You always have to keep yourself between the levels of frustrating but achievable.
你必须始终让自己保持在令人沮丧但可以实现的水平之间。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And as long as you're trying new things, so yes, a new instrument is great.
只要您尝试新事物，那么是的，新乐器就很棒。
Speaking a new language is great.
说一门新语言很棒。
Obviously, we're in a world that's moving very fast, so just keeping up with the technology and figuring out, wow, there's this new opportunity here with this piece of software or whatever.
显然，我们生活在一个瞬息万变的世界，所以只要跟上技术的步伐，然后发现，哇，这个软件或其他什么东西就带来了新的机会。
All that stuff is great.
所有这些东西都很棒。
This is the critically important part.
这是至关重要的部分。
You may know of these studies.
您可能知道这些研究。
There's been this study going on for decades now called the, what is it?
这项研究已经进行了几十年，现在被称为“什么是”？
The Religious Orders Study, up in Chicago area, where there's a whole bunch of nuns and priests that agreed to donate their brains when they passed away.
芝加哥地区的宗教团体研究中心，那里有一大群修女和牧师同意在去世后捐献他们的大脑。
And then when they donate their brains, the researchers examine them, do autopsies on them.
然后，当他们捐献大脑时，研究人员会对他们进行检查、尸检。
What the researchers found is that some fraction of these nuns had Alzheimer's disease, but nobody knew it when they were alive.
研究人员发现，这些修女中的一部分患有阿尔茨海默病，但在她们生前无人知道。
Nobody saw any cognitive deficits.
没有人发现任何认知缺陷。
Why?
为什么？
It's because these women died in their 90s, and to the day they died, they lived in these convents.
这是因为这些妇女在90多岁的时候就去世了，直到她们去世的那一天，她们都住在这些修道院里。
And in the convents, they had social responsibilities.
在修道院里，他们有社会责任。
They had chores.
他们有家务活。
They were fighting with their sisters.
他们正在和姐妹们打架。
They were playing games with their fellow sisters.
她们正在和姐妹们一起玩游戏。
They were singing songs.
他们正在唱歌。
They were doing things all the time, so they kept their brain active.
他们一直在做事情，所以他们的大脑保持活跃。
So even as their brain was physically degenerating with Alzheimer's disease, they were building new roadways.
因此，即使他们的大脑因阿尔茨海默病而退化，他们仍在修建新的道路。
They were building new bridges over these areas.
他们正在这些地区修建新的桥梁。
This is one of the big things that tells us that, contrast this with people who retire at 65, and they go home, and they sit on a couch and watch the television They don't have as good an outcome because they're not challenging their brain anymore.
这是告诉我们的一件大事，与 65 岁退休的人相比，他们回家后坐在沙发上看电视，他们没有那么好的结果，因为他们不再挑战他们的大脑。
So it is so important to be doing things.
所以说，做事是非常重要的。
I once heard the expression that there's nothing as hard that the brain does than other people.
我曾经听过这样一句话：没有什么比大脑做的事情比其他人更难的了。
And so for these women living in convents that were constantly dealing with...
因此，对于这些生活在修道院里的妇女来说，她们不断地应对……
Because you never know what somebody's going to say or how they're going to react or what they're going to do.
因为你永远不知道某人会说什么，他们会如何反应，或者他们会做什么。
So this is great challenge opportunity for the brain.
所以这对大脑来说是一个巨大的挑战机会。
Anyway, the point is, we need to always find that with ourselves.
无论如何，重点是，我们需要始终通过自己找到这一点。
Oftentimes people will ask me, like an older person will say, "Hey, I do crossword puzzles.
人们常常会问我，就像老年人会说的那样，“嘿，我做填字游戏。
Is that good?" Yeah, it's good until you get good at it, and then stop and do something that you're not good at.
这样好吗？”是的，这很好，直到你擅长它，然后停下来做一些你不擅长的事情。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And constantly find the next thing that's a real challenge for you.
并不断寻找下一件对您来说真正具有挑战性的事情。
That's the key thing about plasticity.
这是可塑性的关键。
Essentially, the backstory is this.
本质上，背景故事是这样的。
As you well know, your brain is locked in silence and darkness.
众所周知，你的大脑被锁在沉默和黑暗中。
It's trying to make a model of the outside world, and its whole goal is to make a successful model.
它试图制作一个外部世界的模型，其整个目标就是制作一个成功的模型。
And when it succeeds at that and says, "Oh, okay, wait, I've got good predictions about what's going on," then it stops changing.
当它成功地做到这一点并说：“哦，好吧，等等，我对正在发生的事情有很好的预测”，然后它就停止改变。
That's its goal is to stop changing.
它的目标是停止改变。
And if you're constantly pushing and challenging it with things it doesn't understand, then it'll keep changing.
如果你不断地用它不理解的东西来推动和挑战它，那么它就会不断改变。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Amen to that.
阿门。
I've been trying to beat the drum that the agitation that one feels when trying to learn something new-
我一直在努力克服人们在尝试学习新东西时所感受到的激动——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
it's actually a reflection in part of the catecholamines, right?
它实际上是部分儿茶酚胺的反映，对吗？
Like adrenaline and norepinephrine.
如肾上腺素和去甲肾上腺素。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
The frustration and the agitation that we feel, that's the feedback signal to the brain that, hey, this is different than the stuff you know how to do.
我们感受到的沮丧和激动，这是向大脑发出的反馈信号，嘿，这与你知道如何做的事情不同。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Because the neurons are not thinking, they're firing, right?
因为神经元不思考，所以它们在放电，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And so that neurochemical milieu associated with frustration is one of the triggers that generates plasticity.
因此，与挫败感相关的神经化学环境是产生可塑性的触发因素之一。
Which actually, maybe you can resolve this question for me.
实际上，也许你可以帮我解决这个问题。
I'm struck by the fact that there's so many studies showing that the adult brain can change.
令我震惊的是，有如此多的研究表明成年人的大脑可以改变。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And some of the more interesting ones involve boosting the levels of some neuromodulator, dopamine or acetylcholine or norepinephrine or epinephrine, serotonin.
一些更有趣的涉及提高某些神经调节剂、多巴胺或乙酰胆碱或去甲肾上腺素或肾上腺素、血清素的水平。
But what's so interesting to me is that it seems like you can boost the levels of any of those and get plasticity.
但令我感兴趣的是，似乎你可以提高其中任何一个的水平并获得可塑性。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It's not like one neuromodulator gives you the opportunity for plasticity.
这并不像是一种神经调节剂给你提供可塑性的机会。
So many of the interesting studies on psychedelics are using psychedelics that are kind of like serotonin.
许多关于迷幻药的有趣研究都使用类似于血清素的迷幻药。
They act on different receptors-
它们作用于不同的受体——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
but they're very serotonergic.
但它们具有很强的血清素能。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I remind people of this because people really like to beat up on SSRIs, and I agree they have their problems and side effects, but they've also helped a great number of people.
我提醒人们这一点，因为人们真的很喜欢批评 SSRIs，我同意它们有问题和副作用，但它们也帮助了很多人。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yep.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But whether it's SSRIs or it's psilocybin, they're both just tools for plasticity that drive serotonin.
但无论是 SSRIs 还是裸盖菇素，它们都只是驱动血清素的可塑性工具。
But we know you can amplify acetylcholine, get a window of plasticity.
但我们知道你可以放大乙酰胆碱，获得可塑性的窗口。
This is a speculative question, but why do you think it is that there's this sort of equipotential of neuromodulators, where boosting any one of them can open plasticity or the window-
这是一个推测性的问题，但你为什么认为神经调节剂存在这种等势，增强其中任何一个都可以打开可塑性或窗口 -
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Hmm
嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
or the opportunity for plasticity?
还是可塑性的机会？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Okay, a few things on this.
好的，关于这个的一些事情。
As you well know, all the neuromodulators exist in a dance with each other, and fundamentally, I think we're going to come to understand this in 50 years as sort of combination locks of things.
正如你所知，所有的神经调节剂都以一种共舞的方式存在，从根本上说，我认为我们将在 50 年内将其理解为某种密码锁。
And the way we keep looking at it in science currently is, ah, here's acetylcholine, or here's serotonin, or so on.
目前我们在科学上一直关注它的方式是，啊，这是乙酰胆碱，或者这是血清素，等等。
And it's probably not the right way to look at it, because it's certainly not how the neurons are looking at it.
这可能不是正确的看待它的方式，因为这肯定不是神经元看待它的方式。
Okay.
好的。
That said, acetylcholine really feels to me like the main one involved in plasticity.
也就是说，乙酰胆碱对我来说确实是与可塑性有关的主要物质。
When you are a baby, you've got acetylcholine going everywhere.
当你还是个婴儿的时候，乙酰胆碱就无处不在。
Whenever you're trying to figure out the world, whenever something's not matching a prediction and you've got acetylcholine going everywhere that says, "Hey, I got to figure out what just happened and how to link this with what I did," and so on.
每当你试图弄清楚这个世界时，每当有些事情与预测不符时，你就会得到乙酰胆碱到处说，“嘿，我必须弄清楚刚刚发生了什么，以及如何将其与我所做的联系起来，”等等。
As you get older, it's more like a pointillist artist who just dabs things here or there.
随着年龄的增长，它更像是一个点画艺术家，只是在这里或那里涂抹东西。
You get acetylcholine release very locally in small places, and that's where you make changes.
您可以在小地方局部释放乙酰胆碱，这就是您进行改变的地方。
Why?
为什么？
That's because as you get to be an adult, you've got a better and better model of the world, and you don't want to change everything.
那是因为当你成为一个成年人时，你已经有了一个越来越好的世界模型，并且你不想改变一切。
You just change like, oh, I didn't realize there was that button on the coffee machine that did this new thing, or whatever.
你只是改变了，哦，我没有意识到咖啡机上有一个按钮可以做这个新的事情，或者其他什么。
So you just change little bits at a time here.
所以你在这里一次只需要改变一点点。
We're in this really interesting situation in the history of our species, where now we can do things like, hey, what if we just crank up acetylcholine or obviously we've done lots of things with dopamine.
在我们物种的历史上，我们正处于一个非常有趣的境地，现在我们可以做一些事情，比如，嘿，如果我们只是增加乙酰胆碱，或者显然我们已经用多巴胺做了很多事情。
We always find when we tweak these things that it's complicated.
当我们调整这些东西时，我们总是发现它很复杂。
Just as one example, with Parkinson's, people have less dopamine, and so the medications are to crank up the dopamine.
举个例子，患有帕金森症的人体内的多巴胺较少，因此药物是为了增加多巴胺的水平。
But what that led to, you may know this fascinating story, this is probably 25 years ago now, where observant clinicians noted that people on these Parkinson's medications were becoming hyper-compulsive gamblers.
但是这导致了什么，你可能知道这个引人入胜的故事，这可能是 25 年前的事了，细心的临床医生注意到，服用这些帕金森病药物的人正在变成超级强迫性赌徒。
They were blowing their family's fortune on online gambling and Las Vegas and so on.
他们在网上赌博和拉斯维加斯等方面耗尽了家族的财富。
And what they realized is when you crank up the dopamine, that changes your risk aversion such that people were taking it.
他们意识到，当你增加多巴胺时，就会改变你的风险厌恶情绪，从而人们会接受它。
So now it's a contraindication that's listed on the bottle.
所以现在它是瓶子上列出的禁忌症。
If you notice gambling, turn down the amount here.
如果您注意到赌博，请在此处调低金额。
So anyway, whenever we start dialing these around, we always find things that are a little bit out of our predictive realm.
所以无论如何，每当我们开始进行这些调查时，我们总会发现一些事情有点超出了我们的预测范围。
But the general story is that your brain's trying to put together this model of what's going on, and as it gets better and better, it's doing less and less plasticity.
但总的情况是，你的大脑试图将正在发生的事情组合起来，随着它变得越来越好，它的可塑性越来越小。
I do want to point out, though, that parts of the brain become less plastic and others stay plastic your whole life.
不过，我确实想指出，大脑的某些部分的可塑性会降低，而其他部分则终生保持可塑性。
As an example, your primary visual cortex at the back of the head, that locks down early.
举个例子，你的后脑勺的主要视觉皮层很早就锁定了。
You really can't do much to change that.
你真的无能为力改变这一点。
And there were studies by Logothetis' lab years ago where they looked at changes to, let's say, the retina in an adult monkey, and they expected to see changes in the visual cortex of the monkey, and they didn't see any changes at all.
几年前，Logothetis 实验室进行了一项研究，他们观察了成年猴子视网膜的变化，他们期望看到猴子视觉皮层的变化，但他们根本没有看到任何变化。
And that surprised them, given all the plasticity literature.
考虑到所有可塑性文献，这让他们感到惊讶。
But it's because the visual cortex locks down.
但这是因为视觉皮层被锁定。
In contrast, these downstream areas from the visual cortex that care about things like recognizing faces or new brands of fast food restaurants or whatever it is, those stay plastic your whole life because there's constantly new data coming in on those.
相比之下，视觉皮层的这些下游区域关心诸如识别面孔或快餐店新品牌之类的事情，这些区域在一生中都保持可塑性，因为不断有新的数据进入这些区域。
So the general story is the primary areas are like the, I think about it like the The software kernels where if you're at Microsoft, for example, there's parts of the code that no one ever touches because that's how to add two numbers and multiply whatever.
所以总体来说，主要领域就像，我认为它就像软件内核，例如，如果你在微软，那么有些代码是没有人接触过的，因为这就是如何将两个数字相加并相乘的方法。
That's the kernel of the code.
这就是代码的核心。
You never touch that.
你永远不会碰那个。
But you get these higher and higher application layers on top of that, and that's essentially how to think about primary sensory cortices and then all the stuff downstream from there.
但在此之上你会得到越来越高的应用层，这本质上就是如何思考初级感觉皮层以及那里下游的所有东西。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Perfect analogy for people to understand how much challenge to embrace.
完美的比喻让人们了解要接受多少挑战。
You're not trying to defrag the whole system.
您并不是要对整个系统进行碎片整理。
And I mentioned psychedelics.
我提到了迷幻药。
I do think they have some interesting therapeutic potential.
我确实认为它们具有一些有趣的治疗潜力。
I also worry about, and I can tell you examples of people that got, I guess nowadays they call it one-shotted.
我也担心，我可以告诉你一些人的例子，我想现在他们称之为一次性的。
They take ayahuasca a couple of times and they are forever different in ways that does not serve them.
他们服用死藤水几次，但他们的方式永远不同，这对他们不利。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Wow.
哇。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Those examples don't get talked about quite as often as-
这些例子并没有像——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I'll bet
我敢打赌
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
the also many people who seem to benefit from these things.
还有很多人似乎从这些事情中受益。
So plasticity, it seems, is not the goal.
因此，可塑性似乎并不是我们的目标。
Directed plasticity is the goal.
定向可塑性是目标。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That's right.
没错。
And it's very hard to direct, so I feel like let's imagine you could take some cocktail of neurotransmitters and get total plasticity of your brain.
而且它很难指导，所以我觉得让我们想象一下你可以服用一些神经递质鸡尾酒并获得大脑的完全可塑性。
I don't think you'd want that.
我认为你不会想要这样。
You wouldn't be you anymore.
你就不再是你了。
Who we are is the sum of our memories and the sum of our skills that we have built, and that keeps changing.
我们是谁是我们的记忆和我们所建立的技能的总和，并且不断变化。
We're always a moving target, and who you will be in 5 or 10 years will be different, but I don't think we'd want the plasticity of an infant, even though when you're doing, let's say, language learning, you say, "Oh, I wish I could learn this as well as I did when I was seven." But generally, it's not a state that you would desire, I think.
我们总是一个不断变化的目标，五年或十年后你会成为什么样的人，但我不认为我们会想要婴儿的可塑性，即使当你在学习语言时，你会说，“哦，我希望我能像七岁时那样学得好。”但我认为，一般来说，这不是您想要的状态。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
If you're a regular listener of the Huberman Lab podcast, you've no doubt heard me talk about the vitamin mineral probiotic drink AG1.
如果您是 Huberman Lab 播客的常客，您无疑听过我谈论过维生素矿物质益生菌饮料 AG1。
And if you've been on the fence about it, now's an awesome time to give it a try.
如果您一直对此持观望态度，那么现在正是尝试的好时机。
For the next few weeks, AG1 is giving away a full supplement package with your first subscription to AG1.
在接下来的几周内，AG1 将在您首次订阅 AG1 时赠送完整的补充包。
They're giving away a free bottle of vitamin D3+K2, a bottle of omega-3 fish oil capsules, and a sample pack of the new sleep formula, AGZ, which by the way, is now the only sleep supplement I take.
他们免费赠送一瓶维生素 D3+K2、一瓶 omega-3 鱼油胶囊和新睡眠配方 AGZ 样品包，顺便说一下，它是我现在唯一服用的睡眠补充剂。
It's fantastic.
太棒了。
My sleep on AGZ is out of this world good.
我在 AGZ 的睡眠质量非常好。
AGZ is a drink, so it eliminates the need to take a lot of pills.
AGZ 是一种饮料，因此无需服用大量药片。
It tastes great, and like I said, it has me sleeping incredibly well, waking up more refreshed than ever.
它味道好极了，就像我说的，它让我睡得非常好，醒来时比以往任何时候都精神焕发。
I absolutely love it.
我非常喜欢它。
Again, this is a limited time offer, so make sure to go to drinkag1.com/huberman to get started today.
再次强调，这是限时优惠，因此请务必立即访问 Drinkag1.com/huberman 开始。
You've mentioned a few times future self.
你曾多次提到未来的自己。
I think all of us are inherently interested in our future selves and whether the things of our past, present, and what we have control over going forward is going to put us in the best future self possible, right?
我认为我们所有人都对未来的自己感兴趣，以及我们过去、现在的事情以及我们对未来的控制是否会让我们成为未来最好的自己，对吗？
Humans love to optimize or fantasize about optimal.
人类喜欢优化或幻想最优。
But how should we think about thinking about our future self?
但我们应该如何思考未来的自己呢？
Or should we not do that, right?
或者我们不应该这样做，对吧？
Should we just avoid that loop-de-loop and-
我们是否应该避免这种循环和-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
No
否
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and get real stoic about it and just live in 10-minute time blocks or one-minute time blocks?
并对此保持真正的坚忍，只生活在 10 分钟的时间段或一分钟的时间段中？
It raises a really interesting question, I think, of where should we set our time horizon?
我认为，这提出了一个非常有趣的问题：我们应该把时间范围设定在哪里？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
To not just feel the best, but to be our best and to feel our best going forward.
不仅要感觉最好，而且要成为最好的，并感觉我们前进的最好。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Our capacity to think about our future selves is the most special part of being humans.
我们思考未来自我的能力是人类最特别的部分。
And if we didn't do it, if we said, "I'm going to be stoic about it," you'd eat the cupcake and you'd do what, all the things that wouldn't serve your future self.
如果我们不这样做，如果我们说，“我会对此保持坚忍”，你就会吃纸杯蛋糕，然后你就会做所有对未来的自己无益的事情。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Or never eat the cupcake like a real stoic and then starve to death, right?
或者永远不要像真正的坚忍者一样吃纸杯蛋糕然后饿死，对吧？
Even if the cupcake were the only thing, right?
即使纸杯蛋糕是唯一的东西，对吧？
What would the stoic do?
坚忍者会做什么？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That's right.
没错。
So yeah.
所以是的。
We actually spend most of our time not in the here and now.
事实上，我们大部分时间都不在此时此地度过。
We're reminiscing about the past, and we're simulating possible futures.
我们在回忆过去，我们在模拟可能的未来。
Your mind is a movie theater, we're constantly thinking about where things are going.
你的头脑是一个电影院，我们不断地思考事情的发展方向。
But this is great.
但这很棒。
This is what makes us able to do all the things that humans do successfully.
这就是我们能够成功完成人类所做的所有事情的原因。
And in our own lives, this matters so much because we're able to think about who do I want to be?
在我们自己的生活中，这非常重要，因为我们能够思考我想成为谁？
Now, as you know, we've got this rivalry in the brain.
现在，如你所知，我们的大脑中已经有了这种竞争。
You've got all these voices going on at the same time, all these different networks running.
所有这些声音同时发生，所有这些不同的网络都在运行。
So for example, if I put the cupcake down in front of you, part of your brain wants to eat that.
举例来说，如果我把纸杯蛋糕放在你面前，你大脑的一部分就会想吃它。
It's delicious.
很好吃。
It's a rich energy source.
这是一种丰富的能源。
Part of your brain says, "Don't eat it.
你大脑的一部分会说：“不要吃它。
I want to stay fit." And so part of your brain says, "Okay, maybe I'll eat part of it, but I'll go to the gym later," or, "I promised my girlfriend that I'll go do this thing." We've got all these voices.
我想保持健康。”所以你大脑的一部分会说，“好吧，也许我会吃一部分，但我稍后会去健身房，”或者，“我答应我的女朋友我会去做这件事。”我们收到了所有这些声音。
You can cuss at yourself.
你可以骂自己。
You can cajole yourself.
你可以哄骗自己。
You can contract with yourself.
你可以和自己签订契约。
And the question is who's talking to whom?
问题是谁在和谁说话？
It's all you, but it's parts of you that have these different drives.
都是你自己，但你的某些部分具有这些不同的驱动力。
Now, the part that's really amazing about us is we've got lots of short-term drives, but we also have this capacity to look into the future and think about who we want to be, and that is essentially subserved by our prefrontal cortex, which as we mentioned earlier is something that the size of it is unique to humans.
现在，我们真正令人惊奇的部分是我们有很多短期驱动力，但我们也有这种能力展望未来并思考我们想成为谁，而这本质上是由我们的前额叶皮层维护的，正如我们之前提到的，它的大小是人类独有的。
All of our closest cousins in the animal kingdom don't have a prefrontal cortex that's a fraction of what we have.
动物王国中我们所有的近亲都没有前额叶皮层，而前额叶皮层只是我们所拥有的一小部分。
That's what allows us to unhook from the here and now.
这就是让我们摆脱此时此地的束缚的原因。
Okay, now here's the thing.
好吧，现在事情是这样的。
I have been fascinated by this for a long time about how we sometimes know, okay, my future self is going to act badly in this situation, so I'm going to do something now so that my future self can't act badly.
很长一段时间以来，我一直对此着迷，我们有时如何知道，好吧，我未来的自己在这种情况下会表现得很糟糕，所以我现在要做一些事情，这样我未来的自己就不会表现得很糟糕。
So this is the topic of my next book.
这是我下一本书的主题。
It's called "The Ulysses Contract," and where this term comes from is in "The Odyssey," Odysseus, otherwise known as Ulysses, is coming home from the Trojan War, and he realizes that way up ahead he's going to pass the island of the sirens, where you've got these beautiful female creatures who sing these songs that are so beautiful it beggars the mind of the sailors and everyone crashes into the rocks and dies.
它被称为“尤利西斯契约”，这个术语来源于《奥德赛》，奥德修斯，也被称为尤利西斯，从特洛伊战争归来，他意识到前面的路他将经过塞壬岛，那里有这些美丽的雌性生物，她们唱着这些歌，这些歌是如此美丽，让水手们心烦意乱，每个人都撞到岩石上死了。
Ulysses really wants to hear the song, but he knows like any mortal man he's going to fall for this and crash in the rocks.
尤利西斯真的很想听这首歌，但他知道像任何凡人一样，他会爱上这首歌并坠入岩石中。
So what does he do?
那么他做什么呢？
He has his men lash him to the mast so he can't move.
他让手下把他绑在桅杆上，不让他动弹。
He has them put beeswax in their ears so they can't do anything, and he tells them, "No matter what I do, no matter how much I'm screaming, just keep going.
他让他们把蜂蜡塞进耳朵里，这样他们就什么也做不了，然后他告诉他们，“无论我做什么，无论我尖叫多少，都要继续前进。
Just keep sailing."
继续航行吧。”
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Smart.
聪明。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
It's smart because what is happening is the Ulysses of sound mind is making a contract for the future Ulysses, who he knows is going to behave badly.
这很聪明，因为正在发生的事情是头脑清醒的尤利西斯正在为未来的尤利西斯签订合同，他知道未来的尤利西斯会表现得很糟糕。
So he's lashing him to the mast.
所以他把他绑在桅杆上。
And what I've been fascinated by is the ways that we do this in our lives all the time.
我一直着迷的是我们在生活中一直这样做的方式。
So the example you gave a few minutes ago about locking up your phone in one of these lockboxes is a perfect example, because what you're making sure is that the Andrew of two hours from now can't do the wrong thing, because you know he might.
因此，您几分钟前给出的关于将手机锁在其中一个锁箱中的示例就是一个完美的示例，因为您要确保两个小时后的安德鲁不会做错事，因为您知道他可能会做错事。
You know he's going to be tempted.
你知道他会受到诱惑。
So you take away that temptation.
所以你消除了这种诱惑。
By the way, I recently met an older gentleman who told me about an older woman that he'd met years ago who used to take her money, her cash, and freeze it in a block of ice in the freezer so that she couldn't spend the money-
顺便说一下，我最近遇到了一位年长的绅士，他告诉我他几年前认识的一位年长的女士，她常常拿走她的钱，她的现金，然后把它放在冰箱里的一块冰里，这样她就不能花这些钱了——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Oh my goodness
天哪
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
until she really needed it.
直到她真正需要为止。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah, I don't have a money spending thing.
是的，我没有花钱的习惯。
And I actually have pretty good control-
而且我其实控制力还不错-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right
右
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
with the phone and with social media.
通过电话和社交媒体。
For me, there's also a, I don't want to call it a sick pleasure.
对我来说，还有一种，我不想称之为病态的快乐。
There's a bit of a pleasure in knowing that it's completely off-
知道它完全关闭了，我有点高兴——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
limits because it means I can't even look at it for 10 seconds.
限制，因为这意味着我什至不能看它 10 秒钟。
I don't know.
我不知道。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I think it involves something over control of things that I feel like are trying to control me.
我认为这涉及到对那些我觉得试图控制我的事物的过度控制。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah, exactly.
是的，完全正确。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Which I do not like.
我不喜欢这一点。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Exactly.
正是如此。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Because you care about your future self, and you want future Andrew to do the right thing.
因为你关心未来的自己，你希望未来的安德鲁做正确的事。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So there are a million ways to make these Ulysses contracts, and I've been studying this for years.
因此，有一百万种方法可以制定这些《尤利西斯》合同，我多年来一直在研究这个问题。
Anyway, so I decided to write a book on this because the way that we deal with our future selves is just this fascinating thing, because your future self is a little different than who you are now.
不管怎样，所以我决定写一本关于这个的书，因为我们对待未来的自己的方式是一件令人着迷的事情，因为你未来的自己与现在的你有点不同。
But with time, we come to understand that our future self will behave badly in different situations, and so we just try to cut those off.
但随着时间的推移，我们逐渐认识到，未来的自己在不同的情况下会表现得很糟糕，所以我们只是试图阻止这些行为。
I'll give a couple examples.
我举几个例子。
One is it's super useful to get social pressure involved.
一是让社会压力参与进来非常有用。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So, for example, I'm guessing you and I both do this.
例如，我猜你和我都会这样做。
Going to the gym is something we enjoy, but it's really useful to have a buddy where you say, "Hey, I'll meet you at the gym at 8:00 tomorrow morning." And then even if you wake up, you're a little tired, your shoulder hurts or whatever, you got to go because he's going to be there.
去健身房是我们喜欢的事情，但如果有一个朋友对你说：“嘿，明天早上 8:00 我会在健身房与你见面”，这真的很有用。然后即使你醒来，你有点累，你的肩膀受伤或者其他什么，你也必须离开，因为他会在那里。
So getting social pressure involved is a good idea.
因此，让社会压力参与进来是一个好主意。
I found this thing where it's a boot camp where you sign up for it, and every morning go jogging together and do push-ups, whatever.
我发现了这个东西，它是一个新兵训练营，你可以在那里报名参加，每天早上一起慢跑，做俯卧撑，等等。
But if you don't show up, the group jogs to your house, and they stand on your front lawn, and they do jumping jacks, and they scream your name until you come out.
但如果你没有出现，这群人就会慢跑到你家，站在你家前的草坪上，做开合跳，尖叫着你的名字，直到你出来。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Amazing.
太棒了。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
It's really good to commit to that sort of thing so that you're really going to show up.
致力于这类事情真的很好，这样你才会真正出现。
There are ways to do this where you put money on the line.
有很多方法可以做到这一点，只要你赌上钱。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Okay.
好的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
For example, there was a woman who was trying to quit smoking, and she tried for years to quit smoking.
例如，有一位女士正在尝试戒烟，她尝试了很多年。
So what she did is she wrote a $10,000 check and gave it to her friend and said, "If you catch me smoking, I want you to donate this check to the KKK," which to her was the most aversive thing that could ever happen with her money.
所以她所做的就是写了一张 10,000 美元的支票，交给她的朋友，并说：“如果你发现我抽烟，我希望你把这张支票捐给三K党，”这对她来说是用她的钱可能发生的最令人厌恶的事情。
And that's what prevented her from smoking, because the sting of knowing that she gave her money to the KKK was the worst thing that she could imagine.
这就是阻止她吸烟的原因，因为知道自己把钱捐给三K党的痛苦是她能想象到的最糟糕的事情。
So there are a million ways to do these Ulysses contracts, but what they have in common is how do you lash yourself to the mast so you'll keep the good behavior you want?
因此，执行这些尤利西斯契约有一百万种方法，但它们的共同点是你如何将自己绑在桅杆上，以便保持你想要的良好行为？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
The example of this woman writing the check is interesting because I could ask why couldn't she access her inner...
这个女人写支票的例子很有趣，因为我可以问为什么她不能接触她的内心......
Clearly has a lot of inner fight, right?
显然内心有很多斗争，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
She really stands so strongly on one camp, which I agree, the KKK, horrible organization.
她确实如此坚定地支持一个阵营，我同意这一点，即三K党，一个可怕的组织。
You would never want to support them in any way whatsoever.
你永远不会想以任何方式支持他们。
And yet she needed to do that, right?
但她需要这样做，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
She needed a punishment, a potential punishment.
她需要一种惩罚，一种潜在的惩罚。
And so it speaks to how even if we know something and feel something so strongly in the present-
所以它说明了即使我们知道一些事情并且在当下强烈地感受到一些事情——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes
是的
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
it still becomes very hard to access our best choices.
我们仍然很难获得最佳选择。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But there's something about the future self that we're not even in yet, that we fear our future self so much more than we can't handle the discomfort of our present self.
但对于未来的自己，我们还没有经历过一些事情，我们对未来的自己的恐惧远远超过了我们无法应对现在的自己的不适。
And so we tether those in this Ulysses contract.
因此，我们将这些人束缚在《尤利西斯》合同中。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
It's a kind of wisdom that we come to understand how we will behave when we're not in our present sober, rational moment.
这是一种智慧，让我们了解当我们不在当前清醒、理性的时刻时我们会如何行事。
We come to understand.
我们渐渐明白了。
For example, people who are alcoholics and they're trying to break that.
例如，酗酒的人正在努力戒掉这种习惯。
The first thing they're told at Alcoholics Anonymous is, "Clear all the alcohol out of your house." Because you might think, "Okay, I'm done.
戒酒互诫协会告诉他们的第一件事是：“清除家里所有的酒精。”因为你可能会想：“好吧，我完成了。
I'm firmly going to not drink anymore," so you put the alcohol away up in a high shelf.
我坚决不再喝酒了。”于是你把酒放到了高架子上。
But on a festive Friday night or a lonely Sunday night or something, you might go up there.
但在节日的周五晚上或孤独的周日晚上或其他什么时候，你可能会去那里。
Your future self might do that.
未来的你可能会这么做。
So what you do is you get rid of the temptation.
所以你要做的就是摆脱诱惑。
Same thing with people who are trying to battle drug addictions.
对于那些试图与毒瘾作斗争的人来说也是如此。
They're told, "Never carry more than $20 of cash in your pocket," because at some point, you're going to run into some guy who's trying to sell you drugs.
他们被告知，“口袋里永远不要携带超过 20 美元的现金”，因为在某些时候，你会遇到一些试图向你出售毒品的人。
And if you got the money, it's burning a hole in your pocket, you buy the drugs.
如果你拿到了钱，你的口袋就会烧个洞，你就会去买毒品。
I don't think we can trust our future selves.
我认为我们不能相信未来的自己。
When we're in a moment of reflection and we can think about who we want to be, it's worth setting into place some walls.
当我们处于反思时刻并且可以思考我们想成为谁时，值得设置一些墙。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So that's about avoiding bad behaviors.
所以这就是避免不良行为。
What about building toward future self where we're trying to envision a better version of ourselves that involves actively doing things?
朝着未来的自己努力构想一个更好的自己，积极做事，怎么样？
So there's always dos and don'ts in order to become-
所以总是有该做和不该做的事，以便成为——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
our better self.
我们更好的自己。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
How does Ulysses contract play in when it's not about the sirens, when it's about knowing that we want to be this person or have these attributes, or having done something and trying to tie our future self to our present behavior?
当尤利西斯契约不是关于塞壬时，当它是关于知道我们想成为这个人或具有这些属性，或者已经做了某件事并试图将我们未来的自我与我们现在的行为联系起来时，它会如何发挥作用？
How good are we-
我们有多好——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
at that in general?
一般而言？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Better or worse than avoiding bad behavior?
比避免不良行为更好还是更坏？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Oh, we're terrible at all this stuff.
哦，我们对这些事情都很糟糕。
Take New Year's resolutions.
制定新年决心。
Everybody makes New Year's resolutions.
每个人都制定新年计划。
They rarely last a week or two before they drop off.
它们很少会持续一两周就会消失。
People get busy.
人们变得忙碌。
People get tired or whatever.
人们会感到疲倦或其他什么。
So it's just as important with the positive things to hook things to that.
因此，将积极的事物与积极的事物挂钩同样重要。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
For example, this idea of putting money on the line.
例如，把钱放在网上的这个想法。
There are various websites where you can do this.
您可以在许多网站上执行此操作。
You say, "Okay, look, I'm going to put 50 bucks on the line that I want to be able to bench 250 by this date," or something like that.
你会说，“好吧，听着，我愿意投入 50 美元，希望在这个日期之前能够坐到 250 名板凳席上”，或者类似的话。
And then you've given your money to this company, and you have to get to that point, so you get your money back.
然后你把钱给了这家公司，你必须做到这一点，这样你才能拿回你的钱。
There are lots of ways to do this.
有很多方法可以做到这一点。
...
...
obviously putting, I think you had James Clear on-
显然，我认为你让詹姆斯·克莱尔——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
a little while ago.
不久前。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yep.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And there's all kinds of good ideas that he's got about put your running shoes near the door or whatever, so that it's easy, you get rid of the friction to go do things like that.
他有各种各样的好主意，比如把你的跑鞋放在门附近或者其他什么地方，这样你就可以轻松地摆脱做类似事情的摩擦。
But all of those moves are for your future self.
但所有这些举动都是为了未来的自己。
When you put your shoes near the door before you go to sleep that night, you are doing something because you know your future self's going to be a little bit lazy and tired.
当你那天晚上睡觉前把鞋子放在门边时，你正在做某事，因为你知道未来的自己会有点懒惰和疲倦。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I have friends that are, I'll just call them what I would call them to their face because it's a friendly exchange, are kind of neurotic, right?
我有一些朋友，我会当面称呼他们，因为这是一种友好的交流，他们有点神经质，对吧？
They tend to overthink things.
他们倾向于想得太多。
If they're going to go running at 8:00 a.m.
如果他们打算早上 8:00 去跑步
and it's 8:02, they're like, "I can't go because it's 8:02, not 8:00.
现在是 8:02，他们会说，“我不能去，因为现在是 8:02，而不是 8:00。
I'll go at 9:00.
我9:00去。
Got to do it on the hour," this kind of thing.
必须按时做，”这样的事情。
And then I know people who are like, you just do things, and you don't think about it as much, and they're good at suppressing that voice.
然后我知道有人会说，你只是做事，你不会考虑太多，他们很擅长压制这种声音。
I think we assume that the chatter, the neurosis doesn't exist for them, but I think it does.
我认为我们假设他们不存在喋喋不休、神经症，但我认为确实存在。
They're just better at saying like, "Eh," ignoring that inner voice.
他们只是更擅长说“呃”，忽略内心的声音。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We're never trained how to do this.
我们从未接受过如何做到这一点的培训。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We're never taught as kids, here's when you need to really think and deliberate, and here's when you just need to just do it.
我们从小就没有被教导过，这是你需要真正思考和深思熟虑的时候，这是你只需要去做的时候。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And it's interesting to think about, okay, different career paths, different life requirements, and so forth, but I feel like people fall into two camps with this.
思考一下很有趣，好吧，不同的职业道路，不同的生活要求等等，但我觉得人们因此陷入了两个阵营。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Some people need to think and analyze less and do more, and some people actually need to probably still do, but maybe think a little bit more about their behavior and reflect a bit more, and they would probably both say I'm crazy about this.
有些人需要少思考和分析，多做事，而有些人实际上可能仍然需要这样做，但也许更多地思考他们的行为并更多地反思，他们可能都会说我对此感到疯狂。
I won't tell you where I land.
我不会告诉你我降落在哪里。
I think I'm kind of in the middle.
我想我是介于两者之间。
No, I'm just kidding.
不，我只是开玩笑。
It depends on what's at hand-
这取决于手头有什么——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
for most people, I think.
我想对于大多数人来说。
What do you think that's about, the ability to suppress the various versions of oneself or not?
你认为这是什么意思，是否有能力压制自己的各种版本？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
The inner voice.
内心的声音。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
I would say one of the most fascinating things we've discovered in neuroscience, for my money is, just this issue that along anything we measure, there's a spectrum.
我想说，我们在神经科学中发现的最令人着迷的事情之一，就我的钱来说，就是这个问题，沿着我们测量的任何东西，都有一个频谱。
So just take something like the internal voice.
所以就拿内心的声音这样的东西来说吧。
For my wife, for example, she describes it as her inner radio.
例如，对于我的妻子来说，她将其描述为她内心的收音机。
She's always hearing her inner voice.
她总是能听到自己内心的声音。
I don't really have one.
我真的没有。
I just never hear that.
我只是从来没有听说过。
So we're on opposite ends of the spectrum that way.
所以我们处于光谱的两端。
But one of the things I've studied is aphantasia all the way to hyperphantasia.
但我研究过的一件事是失语症一直到过度幻想症。
That means if I ask you to visualize an ant crawling on a tablecloth towards a jar of purple jelly, some people see it like a movie in their head.
这意味着，如果我让你想象一只蚂蚁在桌布上爬向一罐紫色果冻，有些人会在脑海中看到它就像电影一样。
That's called hyperphantasia.
这就是所谓的过度幻想。
Some people have no picture at all in their head.
有些人脑子里根本没有画面。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Hmm.
嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That's called aphantasia, and everyone is somewhere in between on the spectrum.
这就是所谓的失语症，每个人都处于两者之间。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
What does the middle look like?
中间是什么样子的？
So if I do that, maybe everyone can do this right now.
所以如果我这样做，也许每个人现在都可以做到。
It's a fun-
这是一个有趣的——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
experiment.
实验。
If you're driving, don't close your eyes.
如果你正在开车，请不要闭上眼睛。
I can see-
我可以看到——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Picture a sun coming over the mountain and the-
想象一下太阳从山上照下来，然后——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
rays of the sun poking through the clouds.
阳光透过云层。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And then it starts raining, and rain's coming down.
然后开始下雨，雨一直下。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So the question is, do you see it as clearly as a movie, or do you have really no visual anything in your head, or are you somewhere in between?
所以问题是，你是否像电影一样清晰地看到它，或者你的头脑中真的没有任何视觉任何东西，或者你处于两者之间？
Typically, this is judged on a scale from one to five-
通常，这是按照从一到五的等级来判断的——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
where five is a movie, one is no visual at all, and three is in between.
其中五部是一部电影，一部根本没有视觉效果，三部介于两者之间。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Where do you stand on that?
你对此持什么立场？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I feel like I can see it, quote unquote, in my mind's eye, but it's almost like I'm looking at a silhouette of it.
我觉得我可以在我的脑海中看到它，不言而喻，但这几乎就像我正在看它的剪影。
So even though I want to see bright rays of sunshine, one of my favorite things in life, I know they're there, but they're actually pale yellow.
因此，尽管我想看到明亮的阳光，这是我生命中最喜欢的事物之一，我知道它们就在那里，但它们实际上是淡黄色的。
It's almost as if it's-
几乎就像是——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Hmm
嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
more opaque than it would be in real life.
比现实生活中更不透明。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
You're saying people with hyperphantasia see it as a-
你是说患有过度幻想症的人将其视为——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
They see it like a movie
他们看这就像看电影一样
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
the same way I would on my phone.
就像我在手机上一样。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Essentially, yes.
本质上是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
They're seeing it like vision.
他们将其视为异象。
Now, I happen to be aphantasic, so it's very hard for me.
现在，我碰巧有失语症，所以这对我来说非常困难。
I've studied this for years.
我已经研究这个很多年了。
I've interviewed hundreds of people on this, and so I get their description, but I can't picture that myself.
我就此采访了数百人，所以我得到了他们的描述，但我自己无法想象。
By the way, as an interesting quick tangent, for years I've talked with Ed Catmull about this.
顺便说一下，作为一个有趣的切线，多年来我一直与埃德·卡特莫尔谈论这个问题。
Ed Catmull's the guy who started Pixar.
艾德·卡特莫尔是皮克斯的创始人。
Pixar, with all these terrific animated films and so on.
皮克斯，拥有所有这些精彩的动画电影等等。
Ed has all these patents on how to do ray tracing to get these animated characters looking as amazing as they do.
Ed 拥有所有关于如何进行光线追踪以使这些动画角色看起来像他们一样令人惊叹的专利。
He was surprised when he discovered that he was aphantasic.
当他发现自己失语时，他感到很惊讶。
He doesn't picture anything in his head.
他脑子里什么也没有想象。
So he ended up giving this questionnaire to everybody at Pixar, and it turns out most of his best directors and animators are aphantasic.
所以他最终向皮克斯的每个人做了这份调查问卷，结果发现他的大多数最好的导演和动画师都是失语者。
They don't see anything in their head, and nobody, I think, would've predicted that because it seems so strange to this visual magisterium of Pixar.
他们脑子里看不到任何东西，我想，没有人会预料到这一点，因为这对于皮克斯的视觉权威来说似乎很奇怪。
But I have a hypothesis about why this is.
但我对为什么会这样有一个假设。
It's because the kid who grows up who's aphantasic, when they're asked, "Okay, draw a horse," the kid sitting next to them who's hyperphantasic says, "Oh, I know what a horse looks like" and just draws it, but the poor aphantasic kid has to really stare and figure out, "Oh, okay, how does that work?" and so on.
这是因为长大后的失语孩子，当他们被问到“好吧，画一匹马”时，坐在他们旁边的超幻想孩子会说，“哦，我知道马是什么样子”，然后就画出来了，但是可怜的失语孩子必须真正凝视并弄清楚，“哦，好吧，这是怎么回事？”等等。
And they get better at drawing as a result, and that's why all his best animators and drawers are people who grew up aphantasic.
结果，他们的绘画能力变得更好，这就是为什么他所有最好的动画师和绘图员都是在失忆症中长大的人。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Interesting.
有趣。
I'm just thinking about that movie.
我只是在想那部电影。
Have you seen that movie Bowfinger?
你看过《弓指》这部电影吗？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
No.
不。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
With Steve Martin and Eddie Murphy, where just Bowfinger is the, for those just listening, it's where you make two, an L and a sort of reverse L.
对于史蒂夫·马丁和艾迪·墨菲来说，只有鲍芬格才是，对于那些只是听的人来说，你可以在其中制作两个，一个L和一个反向L。
And it's about making a movie in LA, and it's hilarious.
这是关于在洛杉矶拍电影的，而且很搞笑。
It's spectacularly funny.
这非常有趣。
It's got those two folks I just mentioned, Heather Graham, a bunch of other people.
其中有我刚才提到的两个人，希瑟·格雷厄姆，还有其他一些人。
But he's constantly going around and kind of envisioning that this is the movie.
但他不断地四处走动并想象这就是电影。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
What the shot'll look like.
镜头会是什么样子。
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
This is the movie.
这就是电影。
Exactly.
确切地。
And so I always thought people that make movies are going through life thinking, "Okay, there's the shot, and there's the shot." But I think what you're saying is that there's somewhere in between where people have this kind of fantasy life of like, "Okay, here's the script," and then they can't really imagine it, and so they have to put more work into materializing it.
所以我一直认为拍电影的人在一生中都在思考，“好吧，镜头来了，镜头来了。”但我认为你所说的是介于两者之间的某个地方，人们有这种幻想生活，比如“好吧，这是剧本”，然后他们无法真正想象它，所以他们必须投入更多的工作来实现它。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Okay.
好的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Well, they have a dialogue with the page.
好吧，他们与页面进行对话。
So if you're a guy drawing-
所以如果你是一个画画的人——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
and you're looking at the horse, or you're picturing what Ariel the mermaid looks like or whatever, you're trying lines and scratching and doing things.
你看着那匹马，或者想象美人鱼爱丽儿的样子，或者其他什么，你正在尝试线条、抓挠和做一些事情。
You don't come to the table always saying, "Oh, I know what a mermaid looks like," and you draw it.
你不会总是来到桌子前说：“哦，我知道美人鱼长什么样，”然后你就画它。
So they just end up getting more practice, and they get better at it.
所以他们最终会得到更多的练习，并且变得更好。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Oh, I love this stuff because what we're really getting at here is, I think As you mentioned, everyone has individualized hardware and software.
哦，我喜欢这个东西，因为我们真正想要的是，我想正如你提到的，每个人都有个性化的硬件和软件。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But there are some commonalities.
但也有一些共同点。
And wouldn't it be spectacular if we knew which...
如果我们知道是哪一个，那不是很壮观吗？
Just like we learn, okay, here are the macronutrients, and you perhaps want them in different proportions depending on who you are and what you need.
就像我们学到的那样，好吧，这是常量营养素，您可能需要不同比例的它们，具体取决于您是谁以及您需要什么。
And as a kid, you should probably learn how to climb and run and assuming you have access to all of that, and jump a little bit.
作为一个孩子，你可能应该学习如何攀爬和跑步，并假设你能够接触到所有这些，并跳一点。
But maybe you won't be an athlete, but you need to be active at some point.
但也许你不会成为一名运动员，但在某些时候你需要活跃起来。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And we tend to figure out what we're good at and then really lean into those trenches.
我们倾向于找出自己擅长什么，然后真正投入到这些战壕中。
And then by then, we're getting evaluated for it, and the way we're evaluated puts us on a career track.
到那时，我们就会接受评估，评估的方式会让我们走上职业轨道。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And there's very little opportunity to go back and fill in blanks.
而且几乎没有机会回去填补空白。
Right?
正确的？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That's right.
没错。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I'm never going to be a musician, in part because I'm just not willing to put in the work, because there are other things I'd rather do with my plasticity, right?
我永远不会成为一名音乐家，部分原因是我不愿意投入工作，因为我宁愿用我的可塑性做其他事情，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And maybe that's best.
也许这是最好的。
So big picture question, do you think that human evolution and the progress of building technologies reflects the fact that people get siloed into different tracks, and on the whole, that's advancing our species, right?
这么大的问题，你认为人类的进化和建筑技术的进步是否反映了人们陷入不同轨道的事实，总的来说，这正在推动我们物种的进步，对吗？
You've got people that are hunter-gatherers, still very good at that, and other people building weaponry and other people building AI technologies, and that it would be detrimental to our species if everybody got sort of a core neuroplasticity training, learning how to do a little bit of everything, right?
有些人是狩猎采集者，但仍然非常擅长这一点，还有一些人制造武器，另一些人制造人工智能技术，如果每个人都接受核心神经可塑性训练，学习如何做所有事情，那将对我们的物种有害，对吗？
Or is what we see as chance actually part of the reasons why humans are the curators of the Earth, not just the prefrontal cortex, not just the extended window of plasticity-
或者说，我们所认为的偶然实际上是人类成为地球管理者的部分原因，而不仅仅是前额皮质，不仅仅是可塑性的延伸窗口——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm
毫米
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
but how we are afforded different opportunities to work with that plasticity?
但我们如何获得不同的机会来利用这种可塑性呢？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
I'd say a couple things.
我想说几件事。
One is we're clearly predisposed to particular things.
一是我们显然倾向于特定的事物。
And so, for example, I'd like to be a swimmer as good as Michael Phelps, but I just don't have the wingspan that he does.
举例来说，我想成为一名像迈克尔·菲尔普斯一样出色的游泳运动员，但我只是没有他那样的臂展。
He's got like, I don't know, seven feet between his fingertips or something.
我不知道，他的指尖之间有七英尺之类的东西。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Geez.
天啊。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
There's no way I'm going to be able to be as good as he is.
我不可能像他一样优秀。
That's a genetic thing that he drops into the world with that I don't.
这是他遗传到这个世界的东西，而我却没有。
Fine.
美好的。
So given that people are off on different trajectories anyway, the way I think about this, I don't know how this will translate just in terms of audio, but a space-time cone in physics is where you start in one spot, and then there are all these different trajectories you can take into the future.
因此，考虑到人们无论如何都会走上不同的轨迹，我对此的思考方式是，我不知道这将如何在音频方面进行转化，但物理学中的时空锥体是你从一个点开始的地方，然后你可以将所有这些不同的轨迹带入未来。
Picture this like you're starting at the bottom of the ice cream cone, and you can take any different trajectory as long as it still exists within the ice cream cone.
想象一下，您从蛋卷冰淇淋的底部开始，只要它仍然存在于蛋卷冰淇淋内，您就可以采用任何不同的轨迹。
Okay.
好的。
So we drop into the world with our genetic skills and predispositions.
因此，我们带着遗传技能和倾向来到这个世界。
We have childhoods that we don't choose.
我们有自己无法选择的童年。
We're born into a cultural language and era that we don't choose, and that defines the limits of the ice cream cone, about where we can go with that.
我们出生在一种我们无法选择的文化语言和时代，这定义了蛋卷冰淇淋的局限性，以及我们可以去往何处。
As far as specialization goes, economists will argue this is part of what makes a very healthy society, is that some people become the lumberjacks and some the lawyers and some the accountants, and whatever.
就专业化而言，经济学家会认为这是一个非常健康的社会的一部分，即有些人成为伐木工，有些人成为律师，有些人成为会计师，等等。
I do feel like we're in a really great era, though, in general, in humankind, where kids do get very broad educations, and they're sort of encouraged to try everything and spend a few years in karate and in soccer and in piano lessons and so on.
我确实觉得我们正处于一个非常伟大的时代，但总的来说，在人类中，孩子们确实接受了非常广泛的教育，并且鼓励他们尝试一切，花几年时间学习空手道、足球和钢琴课等等。
That's wonderful.
太棒了。
So my father was a psychiatrist, and he always said, "Really, the whole job of a parent is just to open doors for the child.
所以我的父亲是一名精神科医生，他总是说：“真的，父母的全部工作就是为孩子打开大门。
That's it." So you give the child all these lessons, you open all these doors, and then the kid takes their own path, depending on this extraordinarily complicated formula of things that we'll never understand, but they go through one door and not the others.
就是这样。”所以你给孩子所有这些课程，你打开所有这些门，然后孩子们走自己的路，这取决于我们永远无法理解的极其复杂的事物公式，但他们会穿过一扇门，而不是其他门。
Kierkegaard said, "Every man starts as a thousand men and dies as one." And what he meant, of course, was that you start with all this potential.
克尔凯郭尔说：“每个人开始时都是一千个人，死时都是一个人。”当然，他的意思是，你要从所有这些潜力开始。
You could have been a great saxophonist or whatever, but you're going to die having done exactly what you did and not the other paths.
你本来可以成为一名伟大的萨克斯管演奏家或其他什么，但你会死在你所做的事情而不是其他道路上。
So what's weird about life is that, yeah, every door that you choose, some others close as a result.
所以生活的奇怪之处在于，是的，你选择的每一扇门，其他一些都会因此关闭。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Kierkegaard seemingly understood that the nervous system starts out hyper-wired-
克尔凯郭尔似乎明白神经系统一开始是超连线的——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and then a lot of learning is the pruning back of connections and strengthening of the remaining ones.
然后大量的学习就是修剪连接并加强剩余的连接。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That's exactly right.
完全正确。
So as you of course know, the brain starts out, you've got essentially a fixed number of neurons.
所以你当然知道，大脑一开始就有固定数量的神经元。
There's some debate about whether there's a few new neurons born in humans or not.
关于人类是否会产生一些新的神经元存在一些争论。
Put that aside.
把它放在一边。
What happens is over the first two years, those neurons connect more and more and more and more, and what you end up getting is this hyper-connection by the time you're two years old, and from there, it's just a matter of pruning an overgrown garden, and that's all that's happening.
在最初的两年里，这些神经元的连接越来越多，越来越多，到了两岁的时候，你最终会得到这种超连接，从那时起，你只需修剪一个杂草丛生的花园，这就是所发生的一切。
And the way the pruning happens is based on what you're experiencing in the world.
修剪发生的方式取决于你在世界上所经历的事情。
The world is what prunes your garden and strengthens particular paths and lets other paths go.
世界是修剪你的花园、加固特定路径并让其他路径通行的东西。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
As a bridge, perhaps, between plasticity and time perception, which we've been sort of doing already, I have this practice that I've been doing for a few years in hopes that it's beneficial for something, and I'd just like your thoughts on it.
也许，作为可塑性和时间感知之间的一座桥梁，我们已经在做这件事了，我已经做了几年了，希望它对某些事情有益，我只是想听听你的想法。
I'm not looking for approval here, truly, but here's the idea.
确实，我并不是在这里寻求批准，但这就是我的想法。
I was struck by the somewhat obvious thing that we can close our eyes, focus on our interoception, our skin, our breathing.
我对一个显而易见的事情感到震惊，那就是我们可以闭上眼睛，专注于我们的内感受、我们的皮肤、我们的呼吸。
We can meditate, bring our awareness into the "present." The breathing seems like a good way to do that.
我们可以冥想，将我们的意识带入“当下”。呼吸似乎是一个很好的方法。
Or we can open our eyes, and we can focus on something some distance away.
或者我们可以睁开眼睛，专注于远处的事物。
Or we can imagine the pale blue dot, and we're just this little thing running around on this pale blue dot.
或者我们可以想象那个淡蓝色的点，而我们只是在这个淡蓝色的点上跑来跑去的小东西。
And when we move through those different realms of space, not just outer space, but from body to outside our body to outer space, there's a different time association with each of those, and I'd like your thoughts on that.
当我们穿越这些不同的空间领域时，不仅仅是外太空，而是从身体到体外再到外太空，每个领域都有不同的时间关联，我想听听你对此的看法。
And I just started devoting a little bit of time to stepping from one of these to another and just spending some ...
我刚刚开始花一点时间从其中一个过渡到另一个，并花费一些......
time trying to think and exist in the different time domains in my head.
时间试图在我头脑中的不同时域中思考和存在。
And so I'll do that maybe for two, three minutes, or four minutes, or five minutes.
所以我可能会这样做两分钟、三分钟、四分钟或五分钟。
And I told myself, and I still tell myself, that it affords me some flexibility when something's happening in the moment and you want to get perspective.
我告诉自己，现在仍然告诉自己，当当下发生一些事情并且你想要了解情况时，它为我提供了一些灵活性。
It's about getting out of that time domain and realizing this isn't going to go on forever, even though it feels like it.
这是关于摆脱那个时域并意识到这不会永远持续下去，尽管感觉上是这样。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So I developed this as a bit of a practice for myself-
所以我开发了这个作为自己的一个练习 -
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Nice
尼斯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
because I felt like it's not a meditation, it's a perceptual exercise.
因为我觉得这不是冥想，而是感性的练习。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So what I'm curious about is the relationship between time perception and where we place our attention.
所以我很好奇的是时间感知和我们的注意力放在哪里之间的关系。
That's the first question.
这是第一个问题。
And then maybe what we can do with this, or could we evolve this perceptual exercise so that I, and others perhaps, if they want to, can start to access different space-time representations.
然后也许我们可以用它做什么，或者我们可以发展这种感知练习，以便我和其他人，如果他们愿意的话，可以开始访问不同的时空表示。
Which sounds so fancy-
这听起来很奇特——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
but it's really just a way of getting outside yourself or getting within yourself.
但这实际上只是一种走出自我或进入自我的方式。
Sorry if I'm being choppy here, but this is something that feels very important.
抱歉，如果我在这里有些不稳定，但这感觉非常重要。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I love that.
我喜欢那个。
I think that's brilliant.
我认为那太棒了。
One of the things that is so striking about time perception is that you don't have a single part of the brain that deals with that.
关于时间感知的最引人注目的事情之一是，你的大脑没有任何一个部分来处理时间感知。
You actually have different mechanisms that deal with thinking about long eras of time, and seconds, and subseconds.
实际上，你有不同的机制来处理长时间、秒和亚秒的思考。
Totally different mechanisms going on here, and we can demonstrate this in the laboratory.
这里发生了完全不同的机制，我们可以在实验室中证明这一点。
So time perception's something I've been studying since graduate school, and I'm happy to say I've got papers in "Science" and "Nature" and the top journals on this topic.
因此，时间感知是我从研究生院以来一直在研究的东西，我很高兴地说我在《科学》和《自然》以及关于这个主题的顶级期刊上发表了论文。
Why?
为什么？
Because it's such a weird thing that's so understudied about why we perceive time the way we do.
因为这是一件很奇怪的事情，我们对时间的感知方式还没有得到充分的研究。
So let me say a few things about it.
那么让我对此说几句话。
One is that it is these longer timescales, what you're referring to, thinking about being far away in space and time, this is a cognitive development.
一个是，你所指的是这些更长的时间尺度，思考在空间和时间上的遥远，这是一种认知发展。
Children can't do this well, and they learn better and better.
孩子们做不到这一点，而且他们学得越来越好。
So for example, if you talk to a seventh grader, and you talk about the Roman Empire and what was happening 2,200 years ago, it doesn't mean anything.
举例来说，如果你和一个七年级学生交谈，谈论罗马帝国和 2200 年前发生的事情，那就没有任何意义。
It's like, okay, so that's the past and whatever.
就好像，好吧，那都是过去的事了。
But as you get older, if you become, let's say, a professional historian, you get better and better at understanding that.
但随着年龄的增长，如果你成为一名专业历史学家，你就会越来越了解这一点。
Why?
为什么？
Because you've lived decades, and so now you can sort of think, you can sort of feel what a century might look like.
因为你已经活了几十年了，所以现在你可以思考，你可以感受到一个世纪可能是什么样子。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm.
嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And you can sort of, with practice, get better at these things.
通过练习，你可以在这些事情上做得更好。
But the point is, that is something we learn how to do, both in space and time.
但关键是，这是我们学习如何在空间和时间上做的事情。
Obviously, when you're an infant in the crib, space is just a really close thing, and eventually-
显然，当你还是婴儿床上的婴儿时，空间是一个非常接近的东西，最终——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It's your whole world.
这是你的整个世界。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
It's your whole world.
这是你的整个世界。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
But eventually, you get outside, and you look down long highways in Utah, and you really start getting a better sense of this.
但最终，当你走到外面，俯视犹他州漫长的高速公路时，你真的开始对此有了更好的认识。
To my knowledge, there's no data on what it would be to sort of throw yourself back and forth between these different space-time scales.
据我所知，没有数据表明在这些不同的时空尺度之间来回穿梭会是什么样子。
I love it, though.
不过我喜欢它。
One of the classes I teach at Stanford is called The Brain and Literature.
我在斯坦福大学教授的一门课程叫做“大脑与文学”。
I've always been a lover of literature, and one of the things that I love is when authors do exactly this, where they zoom in on something really tight, and they're really paying attention, and then they zoom way out.
我一直是文学爱好者，我喜欢的事情之一就是当作者这样做时，他们会放大一些非常紧密的东西，并且他们真的很注意，然后他们就会缩小。
That is the most extraordinary sort of feeling.
这是最非凡的感觉。
So anyway, I commend you on coming up with that version of space-time meditation or whatever it is.
所以无论如何，我推荐你提出那个版本的时空冥想或其他什么。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That's very smart.
这非常聪明。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Well, it was born out of this thing, the Victor Frankl thing, like between stimulus and response.
嗯，它是从维克多弗兰克尔的事情中诞生的，就像刺激和反应之间的事情一样。
But there's something about the autonomic nervous system, like when we're in a heightened state of stress, we're not good at getting outside of the moment.
但自主神经系统有一些问题，比如当我们处于高度压力状态时，我们不擅长摆脱当下。
People are like-
人们就像——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
"Take 10 breaths," or whatever.
“呼吸 10 次”之类的。
And it wasn't that I was having struggles with that.
这并不是说我为此感到挣扎。
I just thought it's so interesting, like you watch a movie, and it seems to be placed in a different time domain in each scene.
我只是觉得这太有趣了，就像你看电影一样，每个场景都仿佛被置于不同的时域。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And then you go for a walk or a hike, and I have this obsession with the idea that when we see horizons, we have a different time perception than when we can't see horizons.
然后你去散步或远足，我痴迷于这样一个想法：当我们看到地平线时，我们的时间感知与我们看不到地平线时的时间感知不同。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And there's too many variables to do this right.
要正确地做到这一点有太多的变数。
You could do it in a VR experiment, but-
你可以在 VR 实验中做到这一点，但是——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Hmm
嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
because when there are close walls, you have claustrophobia.
因为当墙壁很近时，你就会产生幽闭恐惧症。
But there are ways to do this correctly, how you change your vision or visualization changes your time perception.
但有一些方法可以正确地做到这一点，你如何改变你的视野或想象会改变你的时间感知。
So I don't know.
所以我不知道。
I just look at it as a flexibility exercise, and I'm a scientist and a weirdo, so I do these things.
我只是将其视为一种灵活性练习，而且我是一名科学家，也是一个怪人，所以我做了这些事情。
But you're the expert in time perception, so I wanted to ask.
但你是时间感知方面的专家，所以我想问一下。
And I also want to ask about time perception.
我还想问一下时间观念。
How good are people at perceiving time, and why am I always late?
人们对时间的感知能力有多强，为什么我总是迟到？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
The why are you always late, that has to do with the Ulysses contract thing, which is just it requires a commitment to say, "I'm going to be the kind of guy who's always on time." And the way to do that is to say, "I'm going to commit to always being five minutes early." So you get to a place early, and you just hang out in your car, and you take care of some texts or whatever.
为什么你总是迟到，这与尤利西斯合同有关，只是它需要承诺说：“我要成为那种总是准时的人。”做到这一点的方法就是说：“我将承诺始终早到五分钟。”所以你很早就到达一个地方，然后你就在车里闲逛，处理一些短信或其他什么。
That's the way to be always on time.
这就是始终准时的方法。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Interesting.
有趣。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Okay, but are people good at perceiving time?
好吧，但是人们善于感知时间吗？
No. We're actually quite terrible at it, and some people are better than others.
不。我们实际上在这方面很糟糕，而且有些人比其他人更好。
But one of the lessons that's emerged from my research on this stuff is that a lot of time is illusory.
但我对这些东西的研究得出的教训之一是，很多时间都是虚幻的。
So you may know, I did this experiment years ago.
所以你可能知道，我几年前做过这个实验。
I was very interested in this question of does time run in slow motion when you're in fear for your life?
我对这个问题很感兴趣：当你对自己的生命感到恐惧时，时间是否会变慢？
Because when I was a child, I fell off of a roof of a house.
因为当我还是个孩子的时候，我从屋顶上摔下来。
I almost died.
我差点就死了。
I landed in a push-up position and busted my nose so badly that they had to remove all the cartilage and so on.
我以俯卧撑的姿势着地，鼻子严重受伤，以至于他们不得不切除所有软骨等。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Whoa.
哇哦。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And I've had a terrible sense of smell ever since because I busted the cribriform plate and everything.
从那时起我的嗅觉就变得很糟糕，因为我打碎了筛板和所有东西。
But the part that interested me, even as a child, was that the whole fall seemed to take so long.
但令我感兴趣的是，即使是小时候，整个秋天似乎持续了很长时间。
It felt like, oh my God, that was this really long thing.
感觉就像，天哪，这真是太长的事情了。
Obviously, I was totally calm during it.
显然，我在这期间非常平静。
I was thinking about "Alice in Wonderland" as I was falling and how this must have been what it was like for her to fall down the rabbit hole.
当我跌倒时，我在想《爱丽丝梦游仙境》，以及她掉进兔子洞的感觉一定是这样的。
This is typical-
这是典型的——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
How old were you?
你当时几岁？
Sorry.
对不起。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I was eight years old.
那年我八岁。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Wow.
哇。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And this is typical when people are in life-threatening situations, is that there's a sense of total calmness and bizarre thought, but also it seems to have taken a long time.
这是人在生命受到威胁时的典型表现，就是有一种完全平静的感觉和奇异的想法，而且似乎需要很长时间。
People report this all the time when they're- Car accidents, they say, "Oh, I watched the hood crumple and the rear view mirror fall off, and I was looking at the face of the other guy," and whatever.
人们总是在发生车祸时报告这一点，他们说，“哦，我看到引擎盖皱巴巴的，后视镜掉下来，我正在看着另一个人的脸，”等等。
People experience this in gun fights, like police officers and so on.
人们在枪战中都会经历这种情况，比如警察等等。
Everything seems to take a longer time.
一切似乎都需要更长的时间。
What happened is when I grew up and became a neuroscientist, I realized no one had ever studied that, and I got really curious about, is it the case that time seems to run in slow motion while you're experiencing it, or is it a trick of memory somehow?
发生的事情是，当我长大并成为一名神经科学家时，我意识到没有人研究过这一点，我真的很好奇，当你经历时间的时候，时间似乎在慢动作运行，或者这是否是记忆的把戏？
So I ran what, to my knowledge, are still the only experiments that have ever been done on this.
因此，据我所知，我进行了迄今为止唯一对此进行过的实验。
Do you know about this?
你知道这件事吗？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yes and no.
是和不是。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Great.
太棒了。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yes, I'm familiar with the paper.
是的，我对报纸很熟悉。
No, I've never heard it this way, so keep going.
不，我从来没有听说过这样的说法，所以继续吧。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Okay, great.
好的，太好了。
So what I did is I rounded up 23 volunteer subjects, and I dropped them from 150-foot-tall tower in free fall backwards, and they're caught by a net below going 70 miles an hour.
所以我所做的就是聚集了 23 名志愿者，然后我将他们从 150 英尺高的塔上以自由落体的方式向后扔下，他们被一张时速 70 英里的网捕获。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I want to be in your experiments.
我想参与你的实验。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
You would've loved this.
你一定会喜欢这个的。
It's terrifying.
太可怕了。
I did it myself three times first to make sure it was all running all right, and it's equally terrifying all three times because you're falling backwards.
我先自己做了三遍，以确保一切正常，这三遍都同样可怕，因为你会向后摔倒。
Okay.
好的。
What I did is I then built a device.
我所做的是然后建造了一个设备。
My students and I built this device.
我和我的学生建造了这个设备。
It fits on people's wrist, and it flashes information at them in such a way that we could measure the speed at which they're taking in information.
它适合戴在人们的手腕上，并向他们闪烁信息，这样我们就可以测量他们接收信息的速度。
Essentially, we're taking advantage of what's called flicker fusion frequency, where we're flashing lights really quickly, and at a certain rate of lights, you can see exactly what's going on, and just faster than that alternation rate, you can't see anything.
本质上，我们正在利用所谓的闪烁融合频率，我们可以非常快速地闪烁灯光，并且在一定的灯光速率下，您可以准确地看到正在发生的情况，而仅比该交替速率更快，您就看不到任何东西。
Okay.
好的。
So we drop people, we had them read the numbers on the wristband, and we're finding out, are people actually seeing in slow motion during a life-threatening situation?
所以我们让人们下来，让他们读取腕带上的数字，然后我们发现，人们在危及生命的情况下真的能看到慢动作吗？
This is on 23 people.
这是23人的情况。
The results were very clear.
结果非常清楚。
People do not see any faster in a life-threatening situation, and yet, when we ask people retrospectively with a stopwatch to judge how long their fall was versus watching someone else do the fall, their own fall felt much longer to them.
在危及生命的情况下，人们的视力并没有变快，然而，当我们要求人们用秒表回顾性地判断自己跌倒的时间与观看别人跌倒的时间相比，他们自己的跌倒对他们来说感觉更长。
Okay.
好的。
Turns out this is all a trick of memory, which is to say when you're in a life-threatening situation, you recruit not just your hippocampus for laying down memory, but a secondary memory track mediated by the amygdala.
事实证明，这都是记忆的把戏，也就是说，当你处于生命受到威胁的情况时，你不仅会调用海马体来储存记忆，还会调用由杏仁核介导的辅助记忆轨道。
You've got this emergency control center, and you're writing down memories in this other secondary track.
你有这个紧急控制中心，你正在另一个辅助轨道上写下记忆。
When you read that back out, you say, "What just happened?
当你读回来时，你会说：“刚刚发生了什么？
What just happened?" You've got all this density of memory that you don't normally have because you've written down every detail.
刚刚发生了什么？”你拥有平常所没有的如此高的记忆密度，因为你已经写下了每一个细节。
So your brain says, "Oh my gosh, this is what happened, and the hood crumpled," and so on.
所以你的大脑会说，“天哪，这就是发生的事情，引擎盖皱巴巴的”，等等。
But it's because all we're ever conscious of is our memory of an event, as in what happened during the event.
但这是因为我们所意识到的只是我们对事件的记忆，就像事件期间发生的事情一样。
So when you're in a life-threatening situation, you write more down, you think it took longer to transpire.
因此，当你处于生命受到威胁的情况时，你会写更多的东西，你认为需要更长的时间才能发生。
And by the way, this issue about memory equals time explains a lot of things.
顺便说一下，这个关于记忆等于时间的问题解释了很多事情。
For example, the issue of when you're a child and summertime seems to take forever, and then by the time you're our age, the summertime seems to disappear.
例如，当你还是个孩子的时候，夏天似乎永远持续下去，而当你到了我们这个年纪，夏天似乎就消失了。
It's because, as a child, you're figuring out the world.
这是因为，作为一个孩子，你正在了解世界。
You're writing down lots and lots of memory during that summer.
那个夏天你写下了很多很多的记忆。
"Oh, this is the first time I ever saw a waterfall and went hiking here and did this thing." But by the time you're our age, you've sort of seen all the patterns before, and so when we look back at a summer, we don't have much new footage to sort of anchor on.
“哦，这是我第一次看到瀑布，还在这里徒步，做这种事。”但当你到了我们这个年纪的时候，你之前已经见过所有的模式了，所以当我们回顾一个夏天时，我们没有太多新的镜头可以作为基础。
So we say, "Oh, well, it was the winter, now it's the fall.
所以我们说，“哦，好吧，那是冬天，现在是秋天。
Okay, fine, I guess that was really fast."
好吧，好吧，我想这真的很快。”
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Amazing.
太棒了。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So this is why time speeds up as we grow older.
这就是为什么随着年龄的增长，时间会加快。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Glucose is a key player in how our body functions, not just in the long term, but in every moment of our lives.
葡萄糖在我们身体的运作中发挥着关键作用，不仅从长远来看，而且在我们生命中的每时每刻都如此。
That's because it is the major fuel for our cells, especially our brain cells.
那是因为它是我们细胞，尤其是脑细胞的主要燃料。
Glucose directly impacts our brain function, mood, and energy levels, and it may even affect our levels of tenacity and willpower.
葡萄糖直接影响我们的大脑功能、情绪和能量水平，甚至可能影响我们的坚韧和意志力水平。
This is why I use the continuous glucose monitor from Lingo.
这就是我使用 Lingo 连续血糖监测仪的原因。
I absolutely love it, and I'm thrilled to have them as a sponsor of the podcast.
我非常喜欢它，我很高兴他们成为播客的赞助商。
Lingo helps me track my glucose in real time to see how the foods I eat and the actions I take impact my glucose.
Lingo 帮助我实时跟踪我的血糖，以了解我吃的食物和我采取的行动如何影响我的血糖。
When glucose in your body spikes or crashes, your cognitive and physical performance do, too.
当您体内的葡萄糖激增或崩溃时，您的认知和身体表现也会随之上升或下降。
In fact, large glucose peaks and valleys lead to brain fog, fatigue, irritability, and hunger.
事实上，大的葡萄糖峰值和谷值会导致脑雾、疲劳、烦躁和饥饿。
What you eat, of course, plays a major role in your glucose.
当然，你吃的东西对你的血糖起着重要作用。
Some foods cause sharp spikes and big crashes, and others do not.
有些食物会导致急剧的峰值和严重的崩溃，而另一些则不会。
But not everyone is the same in terms of how they respond to particular foods.
但并不是每个人对特定食物的反应都是一样的。
Seeing your glucose in real time helps you build eating and other habits that support metabolic health, mental clarity, and sustained energy.
实时查看您的血糖有助于您养成饮食和其他习惯，从而支持代谢健康、思维清晰和持续精力充沛。
Lingo has helped me to better understand what foods to eat, when to eat, and how things like a brief walk after a meal can help keep my glucose stable and much more.
Lingo 帮助我更好地了解该吃什么食物、何时吃以及饭后短暂散步等活动如何帮助我保持血糖稳定等等。
If you'd like to try Lingo, Lingo is offering Huberman podcast listeners in the US 10% off a four-week Lingo plan.
如果您想尝试 Lingo，Lingo 将为美国的 Huberman 播客听众提供为期 4 周的 Lingo 计划 10% 的折扣。
Terms and conditions apply.
条款和条件适用。
Visit hellolingo.com/huberman for more information.
请访问 hellolingo.com/huberman 了解更多信息。
The Lingo glucose system is for users 18 and older, not on insulin.
Lingo 葡萄糖系统适用于 18 岁及以上的用户，不适用于胰岛素使用者。
It is not intended for the diagnosis of diseases, including diabetes.
它不适用于诊断疾病，包括糖尿病。
Individual responses may vary.
个人反应可能有所不同。
I feel like what you're covering today is the most interesting things about life and experience.
我觉得你今天所讲的内容是关于生活和经历的最有趣的事情。
I have a question about the fall experiment.
我有一个关于秋季实验的问题。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Is it accurate to say that your perceptual frame rate during a highly stressful experience is not different?
说在高压力体验期间您的感知帧速率没有不同是否准确？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Is no different.
没有什么不同。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
You're not taking a higher frame rate movie.
您拍摄的不是更高帧速率的电影。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Okay, which more frame rate is how they generate slow motion, for instance.
好的，例如，更高的帧速率是它们生成慢动作的方式。
Makes sense.
有道理。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes, exactly.
是的，完全正确。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
As opposed to strobe frame rate or just...
与频闪帧速率或只是......
Right?
对吗？
But that, in some sense, your unconscious frame rate is because the amygdala is tracking more information than you normally would have access to in, say, a calm everyday experience.
但从某种意义上说，你的无意识帧速率是因为杏仁核正在跟踪比你通常在平静的日常体验中可以获得的信息更多的信息。
And so the memory is higher frame rate, but the experience is not.
所以内存的帧率更高，但体验却不高。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah, it's really close.
是的，真的很接近。
I wouldn't use the term frame rate in there.
我不会在那里使用术语“帧速率”。
It's just that you have under normal circumstances, you write down almost nothing.
只是在正常情况下，你几乎什么都不写。
Everything's passing through, you're not really remembering much.
一切都过去了，你并没有真正记住太多。
But in an emergency situation, your amygdala, being the emergency control center, says, "Everybody stop what you're doing.
但在紧急情况下，作为紧急控制中心的杏仁核会说：“每个人都停止正在做的事情。
This is the most important thing going on.
这是正在发生的最重要的事情。
Everyone pay attention to this." So you're noticing every detail, and you're not used to that.
大家都注意这一点。”所以你会注意到每一个细节，但你对此并不习惯。
So just for anyone who knows what I'm referring to here as a Bayesian issue, your brain thinks, okay, a certain amount of memory must equal a certain amount of time.
因此，对于任何知道我在这里所说的贝叶斯问题的人来说，你的大脑会认为，好吧，一定量的内存必须等于一定量的时间。
Now you've got just a lot more detail, and so it says, "Oh, well, that must have been six seconds or something." What I did, by the way, I collected hundreds and hundreds of subjective reports from people who had been in accidents of various sorts.
现在你已经得到了更多的细节，所以它说：“哦，好吧，那一定是六秒之类的。”顺便说一句，我所做的事情是从经历过各种事故的人那里收集了成百上千的主观报告。
This guy got in a motorcycle accident and had come off the motorcycle, and it turned over and over and over on the road, and he said as he was rolling over and over, he was composing a little ditty in his head, like a little song to the sound of his helmet hitting the road and so on, because this is the kind of bizarre thought that people have.
这个人出了摩托车事故，从摩托车上下来，在路上翻来覆去，他说他一边翻来覆去，一边在脑子里写着一些小曲子，比如配着头盔撞击路面的声音唱一首小曲等等，因为这就是人们有的那种奇怪的想法。
But it seemed to have taken a long time, and when he saw footage of it afterwards, the whole thing took, whatever, a second or two, but it seemed to him to have taken six seconds.
但这似乎花了很长时间，当他后来看到镜头时，整个过程花了一两秒，但在他看来却花了六秒钟。
But again, it's in retrospect when he's thinking, what happened?
但当他回想起来时，他又在想，到底发生了什么？
What was the event like?
活动怎么样？
By the way, I'll just mention, after I published this paper, sometimes people would come up to me after a talk and say, "I know that's not true because I was in a car accident.
顺便说一句，我想提一下，在我发表这篇论文后，有时人们会在演讲结束后对我说：“我知道这不是真的，因为我出了车祸。
I know it took a long time." And I said, "Okay, look, the person on the passenger seat next to you who was screaming, 'No!' Did it actually sound like they were saying, 'Nooo?' Because if time were running in slow motion, that has to be the consequence, that everything is spread out." And they had to allow that it didn't sound like sounds were distorted and so on.
我知道这花了很长时间。”我说：“好吧，看，坐在你旁边乘客座位上的那个人正在尖叫，‘不！’听起来他们真的是在说“不吗？”因为如果时间以慢动作运行，那么结果就是一切都被分散了。”他们必须允许声音听起来不失真等等。
So, it is really about having a higher density of memory.
所以，这实际上是关于拥有更高密度的内存。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Super interesting.
超级有趣。
What about for non-stressful, non-life-threatening circumstances?
那么对于没有压力、没有生命危险的情况呢？
Like, just pick a purely happy event.
比如，就选一件纯粹的喜事吧。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
One would hope.
人们会希望。
Day of one's wedding.
某人结婚的日子。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I was about to say birth of a child, but depending on who's doing the majority of the work and how stressful it was, of course, the birth of a healthy child is a super wonderful event, but it can be very stressful, too-
我本来想说的是孩子的出生，但是取决于谁在做大部分工作以及压力有多大，当然，一个健康的孩子的出生是一件超级美妙的事情，但它也可能会非常有压力——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
under certain circumstances.
在某些情况下。
So let's pick something purely happy, right?
那么我们就选一些纯粹快乐的事情吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
A terrific wedding, a great party, maybe a vacation with your spouse or family, where it just is like bliss day.
一场精彩的婚礼，一场盛大的派对，也许是与您的配偶或家人一起度假，这就像幸福的一天。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Are you clocking more experiences?
您是否有更多体验？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So any time you're doing something novel, and this actually ties back to the conversation we had before about seeking novelty.
因此，每当你在做一些新颖的事情时，这实际上都与我们之前关于寻求新颖性的对话有关。
Whenever you're doing something novel, you're writing down more memory, and that's the whole key.
每当你做一些新奇的事情时，你都会写下更多的记忆，这就是关键。
So, for example, if you spent your last weekend going off and doing something wacky that you'd never done before, parasailing over sharks or whatever the thing is, you'd come back and you'd think, "Wow, it seems like it was so long since Friday.
所以，举例来说，如果你在上周末出去做了一些你以前从未做过的古怪事情，比如在鲨鱼上滑翔伞或其他什么东西，你回来后会想，“哇，距离周五似乎已经过去很久了。
Now it's Monday, and it's been forever since I was back in the studio." But if you have a normal weekend where you're not doing much of anything but surfing Instagram or something, then you come back and you think, "God, it was just Friday." The difference is just how much memory you clocked and therefore what you can draw on in terms of footage.
现在是周一，自从我回到工作室以来，已经是永远的周一了。”但如果你有一个正常的周末，除了浏览 Instagram 或其他什么事情之外什么都不做，那么你回来后会想：“天啊，这只是星期五。”区别在于您的时钟有多少内存，以及您可以在素材方面利用什么。
I actually think this happens with drugs, where people sometimes have the experience on marijuana where they think, "Wow, I've been standing here forever." And it's because they're having a hard time anchoring down on footage about, like, when did I arrive to the kitchen?
我实际上认为这种情况发生在毒品上，人们有时会有吸食大麻的经历，他们会想，“哇，我已经永远站在这里了。”这是因为他们很难锁定有关我什么时候到达厨房的镜头？
What happened since I've been here?
自从我来到这里之后发生了什么？
And so they just don't know.
所以他们就是不知道。
But anyway, the point is, sometimes people have this idea about time speeding up as you get older.
但无论如何，关键是，有时人们有这样的想法：随着年龄的增长，时间会加快。
They say, well, to an eight-year-old, a summer is this big fraction of their life, but to a 50-year-old, it's a smaller fraction.
他们说，对于一个 8 岁的孩子来说，夏天是他们生命中的一个重要部分，但对于一个 50 岁的人来说，它只是一个较小的部分。
But I don't think that's it at all.
但我认为根本不是这样。
It's what you did this past weekend can make the weekend seem longer.
上周末你所做的事情会让周末看起来更长。
When it comes to some great new event, like the birth of a child or a wedding or whatever it is, it has to do with how much attention you're paying and how much memory you're writing down.
当涉及到一些重大的新事件时，例如孩子的出生或婚礼或其他任何事情，这与您投入的注意力和记下的记忆量有关。
And that means it is, to some degree, in our control.
这意味着在某种程度上，它在我们的控制之下。
If we really attend to things and write down memories instead of letting life just wash over us, we can seem as though we've lived longer.
如果我们真正关注事物并写下回忆，而不是让生活淹没我们，我们就会看起来好像活得更久了。
I'm not talking about longevity, I'm just talking about making it seeming as though you've lived longer, which is...
我不是在谈论长寿，我只是在谈论让你看起来好像活得更长，这就是……
Look, here's something that I try to do all the time, is just switch stuff up.
听着，这是我一直在尝试做的事情，就是改变东西。
For example, brushing your teeth with your other hand.
例如，用另一只手刷牙。
Not hard to do, but it's just one of a million ways of knocking yourself off a path.
做起来并不难，但这只是让自己偏离正轨的一百万种方法之一。
One thing I try to do every time I drive home from Stanford is I try to take a different drive home, a different route home.
每次我从斯坦福开车回家时，我都会尝试做的一件事就是尝试乘坐不同的车、不同的路线回家。
Wastes an extra minute, whatever, but I'm seeing new things.
多浪费一分钟，无论如何，但我看到了新的东西。
I'm observing new things about the neighborhood or whatever that I hadn't noticed before.
我正在观察附近的新事物或任何我以前没有注意到的东西。
One thing that's very easy to do is just rearrange your office.
一件很容易做的事情就是重新布置你的办公室。
Like push your desk over here, take two paintings and just swap them on the wall.
就像把你的桌子推到这里，拿两幅画，然后把它们交换在墙上。
All this stuff is super easy, but it really matters.
所有这些东西都非常简单，但确实很重要。
It's important because what it's doing is enhancing brain plasticity in the sense of just challenging.
这很重要，因为它正在做的是增强大脑的可塑性（从挑战性的意义上来说）。
Your internal model says, "Okay, I've got this world," and then suddenly it says, "Oh, there's something new.
你的内部模型说，“好吧，我已经有了这个世界”，然后突然说，“哦，有一些新东西。
There's something interesting going on in this world." And it makes it seem as though you've lived longer because you're writing down more memories about everything.
这个世界上正在发生一些有趣的事情。”这会让你看起来活得更长，因为你写下了更多关于一切的记忆。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Gosh, this time perception thing, I spend way too much time thinking about it, and I'm still trying to wrap my head around how much time we should spend trying to be present.
天哪，这一次感知的事情，我花了太多时间思考它，而且我仍在努力思考我们应该花多少时间来尝试呈现。
So I have a, and this is not an official definition, but my kind of understanding of the dopamine system and addiction, as I say, and people have heard me say before, addiction is a progressive narrowing of the things that bring you pleasure.
所以我有一个，这不是一个官方定义，而是我对多巴胺系统和成瘾的理解，正如我所说，人们以前听我说过，成瘾是对给你带来快乐的事物的逐渐缩小。
It also involves continued use or behavior despite negative consequences.
它还涉及不顾负面后果的持续使用或行为。
But I mention the other definition of addiction, progressive narrowing of the things that bring you pleasure, because I was trying to come up with some At least accurate, but not exhaustive definition of enlightenment.
但我提到了成瘾的另一个定义，逐渐缩小给你带来快乐的事物，因为我试图提出一些至少准确但不是详尽的启蒙定义。
When people talk about enlightenment, right?
当人们谈论启蒙时，对吗？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
All these monks who get so present through all this meditation, or people who go to Big Sur and they get, they're so present, present, present, enlightenment.
所有这些通过所有这些冥想变得如此临在的僧侣，或者去大苏尔的人们，他们都得到了，他们是如此的临在，临在，临在，启蒙。
I think of one definition might be, okay, I'm not the authority on this, but might be a progressive expansion of the things that bring you pleasure.
我认为一个定义可能是，好吧，我不是这方面的权威，但可能是给你带来快乐的事物的逐步扩展。
But to-
但是为了——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
really get pleasure out of a sip of water, I'm not terribly thirsty right now.
喝一口水真是太享受了，我现在并不渴。
If I take a sip of water, it doesn't taste anything like if I were very thirsty.
如果我喝一口水，它的味道不会像我很渴时那样。
But we need to pay attention.
但我们需要注意。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
What is paying attention?
关注什么？
It's being, most of the time, in the present, right?
大多数时候，它是在当下，对吗？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Paying attention to these things.
关注这些事情。
But if we spend all our time in the present, we eliminate Ulysses contract.
但如果我们把所有的时间都花在当下，我们就消除了《尤利西斯契约》。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So the extremes can't be good, but I think examining the extremes, like the free fall experiment, they're useful windows into time perception and how we measure life.
所以极端情况不可能是好事，但我认为检查极端情况，比如自由落体实验，它们是了解时间感知和我们如何衡量生命的有用窗口。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
It could be that by establishing Ulysses contracts in many aspects of our lives, we get more of an opportunity to be in the present.
通过在我们生活的许多方面建立尤利西斯契约，我们可能会获得更多活在当下的机会。
Because we know, look, I don't have to worry about my future self.
因为我们知道，看，我不必担心未来的自己。
I'm not going to eat that cookie.
我不会吃那块饼干。
I am going to go to the gym, whatever, because I've already set up these contracts.
不管怎样，我要去健身房，因为我已经签订了这些合同。
I don't have any cookies in my house.
我家里没有饼干。
I'm meeting my buddy at the gym, whatever.
不管怎样，我要在健身房见我的朋友。
Then you have more of an opportunity to be in the present.
那么你就有更多的机会活在当下。
You don't have to simulate all kinds of futures.
您不必模拟各种未来。
Yeah, I think paying attention to things matters a lot, but we have to be smart about what we pay attention to.
是的，我认为关注事物很重要，但我们必须明智地对待我们关注的内容。
It might be lovely to really love the water and so on, but not your Instagram feed or something.
真正热爱水之类的东西可能很可爱，但不是你的 Instagram 动态或其他东西。
So it's just a matter of thinking clearly about what you want to pay attention to and devote your memories to.
所以，你只需想清楚你想要关注什么、投入你的记忆就可以了。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And this translates into what you set up.
这会转化为您所设置的内容。
Like, I'm going to set up a dinner at my house.
就像，我要在我家举办一顿晚餐。
I'm going to invite my close friends, and I'm going to have this dinner and pay 100% attention to this dinner.
我要邀请我的亲密朋友，我要吃这顿晚餐，并且百分百地关注这顿晚餐。
I'm going to be present at this thing, because that's the stuff of life.
我会出席这件事，因为这就是生活的内容。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Where I'm getting to with this is that there's beauty and there's tragedy at every spatial scale-
我想说的是，在每个空间尺度上都有美丽和悲剧——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and every temporal scale.
以及每个时间尺度。
Right?
正确的？
Unfortunately, in my neighborhood, this issue has not been resolved.
不幸的是，在我家附近，这个问题还没有得到解决。
In many places, we have homelessness, and drug addicted, and mental illness population, and those intersect in very complicated ways.
在许多地方，我们有无家可归、吸毒成瘾和精神疾病的人口，这些人口以非常复杂的方式交织在一起。
That is so extreme that you can see people who are paying immense amount of attention to what anyone else would consider trivial, like the-
这是如此极端，以至于你可以看到人们非常关注其他人认为微不足道的事情，比如——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
bits of dirt on the sidewalk, and this or that.
人行道上的一些泥土，还有这个或那个。
And it's so tragic, right?
而且这也太悲剧了吧？
We can see that that's not a good use of one's time, attention, and focus, right?
我们可以看到，这并没有很好地利用一个人的时间、注意力和注意力，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But there's also beauty at all sorts of scales, right?
但也有各种尺度的美，对吧？
I think one of the obsessions that people have with fractals and these organization at very small scales all the way up to very large scales, is it brings us to this relationship with life.
我认为人们对分形和这些从非常小的尺度一直到非常大的尺度的组织的痴迷之一是它给我们带来了与生活的这种关系。
There's all this stuff we can't see, and it's beauty at every scale, tragedy at every scale, right?
这一切都是我们看不见的东西，无论从哪个角度看都是美丽的，从每个角度看都是悲剧，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I don't even have to mention a tragedy at massive scale because they're all over the world, and they have been throughout human history, frankly.
我什至不必提及大规模的悲剧，因为坦率地说，它们遍布世界各地，而且贯穿人类历史。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
By the way, I was just in Las Vegas at CES, giving a talk yesterday.
顺便说一句，我昨天刚刚在拉斯维加斯的 CES 上发表演讲。
And as I was leaving, I looked out the window and there was this Chinese lion statue, and there was this homeless woman smoking a cigarette, and she was rubbing this thing very vigorously.
当我离开时，我向窗外望去，那里有一座中国狮子雕像，还有一个无家可归的女人在抽烟，她正在非常用力地摩擦这个东西。
And the guy driving the car told me, "Oh, that's good luck if you rub the statue."
开车的人告诉我，“哦，如果你摩擦雕像，那就祝你好运了。”
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Okay.
好的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Which is, of course, ridiculous.
这当然是荒谬的。
But the woman was rubbing and rubbing and rub.
但那个女人一直在摩擦、摩擦、摩擦。
We're at a red light, and I watched her for like 60 seconds doing this.
我们正等红灯，我看了她大约 60 秒。
And yeah, and it was tragic to me because her brain has set up an association, which is, if I do this action, there will be this result.
是的，这对我来说是悲惨的，因为她的大脑已经建立了一个关联，那就是，如果我做了这个动作，就会有这个结果。
That's what her future simulation is telling her.
这就是她未来的模拟告诉她的。
And, as far as we can tell, that's not true, that she'll have good luck from doing that.
而且，据我们所知，这不是真的，她这样做会带来好运。
But yeah, that was an example of tragedy.
但是，是的，这是一个悲剧的例子。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah, it's almost like the worst thing for any human suffering from mental illness or not is to perseverate on one spatial or timescale.
是的，对于任何患有精神疾病或未患有精神疾病的人来说，最糟糕的事情就是在一个空间或时间尺度上坚持下去。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
To get in the tunnel of the thing that's right in front of you.
进入你面前事物的隧道。
Or to be lost out, we see people and we even know some people who are arguably a little bit strange, and not maybe perhaps to the extent of full pathology, but they got their head in the clouds all the time.
或者迷失方向，我们看到一些人，甚至认识一些可以说有点奇怪的人，也许还没有达到完全病态的程度，但他们总是把自己的头脑放在云端。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
You can't really function in life.
你无法在生活中真正发挥作用。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
They need handlers, right?
他们需要处理程序，对吗？
I know some creative people like this.
我认识一些像这样有创造力的人。
The only reason why they are not like the first person I described-
他们不像我描述的第一个人的唯一原因是——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
is because they have handlers to handle all the stuff that's at closer spatial scale.
是因为他们有处理程序来处理所有更接近空间尺度的东西。
Get organized.
组织起来。
But actually, I'll just give a concrete example because he was so awesome.
但实际上，我只是举一个具体的例子，因为他太棒了。
I didn't know him personally, but Shane MacGowan, the singer for The Pogues-
我个人并不认识他，但是 The Pogues 的歌手 Shane MacGowan——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Okay
好的
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
who had severe, this is not a secret, had severe issues with alcohol.
谁患有严重的酒精问题，这不是秘密。
All his teeth had rotted out.
他所有的牙齿都烂掉了。
Later in life, they gave him teeth.
后来，他们给了他牙齿。
But I was once going to see The Pogues in San Francisco.
但我有一次要去旧金山看波格斯乐队。
I love The Pogues.
我爱波格斯。
And that day, I got to the city early, brought my work up there, and I see this guy walking along Geary.
那天，我很早就到了城里，把我的工作带到了那里，我看到这个人沿着 Geary 走。
I didn't know who it was at the time.
我当时不知道是谁。
He's got this really nice, it looked like almost like a silk shirt, and the tag is still on it, and he's just shuffling out into traffic.
他的这件衣服非常好，看起来几乎就像一件丝绸衬衫，而且标签还在上面，而他只是拖着脚步走进车流。
And I'm like, "Oh my God, this guy's going to get killed," so I get out.
我当时想，“天哪，这家伙会被杀的，”所以我就出去了。
It's Shane MacGowan.
我是肖恩·麦高恩。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Wow.
哇。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And then his team comes running over like, "Oh, we got to get him back." He was so-
然后他的团队跑过来说道：“哦，我们必须把他救回来。”他是这样的——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Wow
哇
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
blasted.
被炸了。
He didn't even know where he was.
他甚至不知道自己在哪里。
And apparently that's how he was much of his life.
显然这就是他一生的大部分时间。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Oof.
噢。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
That evening, he got on stage, barely made it to the microphone, and gave a legendary, one of many legendary Pogues shows, right?
那天晚上，他登上了舞台，勉强走到了麦克风前，献上了一场传奇般的表演，这是波格斯众多传奇表演之一，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Wow.
哇。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And for those that don't know The Pogues, you should look it up.
对于那些不了解 The Pogues 的人，您应该查一下。
And if you do, they're in tons of movies, and the "Love You To The End" song that's in every romantic comedy, that's them.
如果你这样做了，他们就会出现在无数的电影中，而每部浪漫喜剧中的“爱你到底”歌曲就是他们。
So there are people like that, and oftentimes the ultra creatives, they're adrift.
所以有这样的人，而且往往是超级有创造力的人，他们却随波逐流。
I'm not suggesting the alcohol, but to be able to kind of pull all that into the moment seems to be their super skill.
我并不是建议喝酒，但能够将所有这些都融入到当下似乎是他们的超级技能。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Most people, it seems, and I wonder if you think a definition of mental health is the ability to switch from these different time domains.
似乎大多数人，我想知道你是否认为心理健康的定义是从这些不同时域切换的能力。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Because you also don't want to be in a watchmaker mode all the time.
因为您也不希望一直处于制表师模式。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
That watchmaker needs to pay attention to his or her kids.
那个钟表匠需要关注他或她的孩子。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Well, I tell you, Albert Einstein said that he really enjoyed tasks like fixing a doorknob in his house or something.
好吧，我告诉你，阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦说他真的很喜欢在家里修理门把手之类的任务。
And I do that all the time, I live in this very old house, and I'm doing lots of little dinky repairs all the time, and I love that, just-
我一直这样做，我住在这座非常老的房子里，我一直在做很多小小的修理，我喜欢这样，只是-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
crossing these scales.
跨越这些尺度。
But I do want to say something about addiction, because I think this is an awesome example about brain plasticity, and something that I wrote about in my book, "Livewired," about this, which is Addiction is all about brain plasticity.
但我确实想说一些关于成瘾的事情，因为我认为这是关于大脑可塑性的一个很棒的例子，我在我的书《Livewired》中写过一些关于这一点的内容，即成瘾就是关于大脑可塑性。
You put a certain drug in your system, and what your brain does is it up-regulates the receptors for that drug, which is its way of saying, "Oh, I didn't know the world consisted of this stuff.
你将某种药物放入你的系统中，你的大脑所做的就是上调该药物的受体，这就是它在说：“哦，我不知道世界是由这种东西组成的。
Good, I'm going to prepare for this now, and I expect more of it." So then you give it more, and it says, "Great, I'm going to up-regulate the receptors again." And it comes to expect that this is in the world.
很好，我现在就为此做准备，我期待更多。”然后你给它更多，它会说：“太好了，我将再次上调受体。”它开始期待这是在世界上。
And then if you stop, you have these awful drug withdrawal symptoms precisely because you've changed your system.
然后，如果你停下来，你就会出现这些可怕的戒断症状，正是因为你改变了你的系统。
Now it's expecting the world to have that.
现在它期望世界拥有这样的东西。
So I draw an analogy between that and heartbreak, because when somebody that you love, let's say, dies or leaves town or whatever the thing is, your brain has come to expect the presence of that person in your world.
因此，我将其与心碎进行类比，因为当您所爱的人去世或离开城镇或发生任何事情时，您的大脑就会开始期待那个人出现在您的世界中。
Has thought, "Okay, the world consists of this," and now that person is gone.
曾经想过，“好吧，世界就是这样组成的”，现在那个人已经走了。
And heartbreak is a really painful physiological thing that you have to go through as your brain readjusts to the world without that person.
心碎是一种非常痛苦的生理过程，当你的大脑重新适应没有那个人的世界时，你必须经历它。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Something that I would hope no one would have to experience, but everyone loses people-
我希望没有人经历这样的事情，但每个人都会失去亲人——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
But we all will
但我们都会
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
at some point.
在某个时刻。
Or a pet, or both.
或者是宠物，或者两者兼而有之。
Do you think that constant engagement in, let's just say, TikTok-type social media, that up-regulates the quote-unquote receptors of expectation for it, that make it harder for people to stop using it?
您是否认为持续参与 TikTok 类型的社交媒体会提高人们对它的期望受体，从而使人们更难停止使用它？
Because the drug and addiction definition you gave, which I love, you have dopamine receptors for methamphetamine or for cocaine and so on, but for an experience, for gambling, for social media, the receptors become more like circuit activations, or the circuits of the brain anticipate it, and if they don't get it, do you think that there's a kind of a withdrawal-like effect?
因为我喜欢你给出的药物和成瘾定义，你有甲基苯丙胺或可卡因等的多巴胺受体，但是对于体验，赌博，社交媒体，受体变得更像是电路激活，或者大脑电路预测它，如果他们没有得到它，你认为有一种类似戒断的效果吗？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I don't know how I feel about this.
我不知道我对此有何感想。
I wonder, when we were growing up, people said, "Oh, it's the television.
我想知道，当我们长大的时候，人们会说：“哦，是电视。
The television's ruining everyone's attention span" and so on.
电视正在破坏每个人的注意力”等等。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It'll rot your brain.
它会腐蚀你的大脑。
I remember-
我记得——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
It'll rot your brain.
它会腐蚀你的大脑。
Exactly
正是如此
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
my mom would kick us out.
我妈妈会把我们赶出去。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
This was very common.
这很常见。
She'd say, "You got to go outside." She would lock us out of the house.
她会说：“你必须出去。”她会把我们锁在门外。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Exactly.
正是如此。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We weren't allowed back in.
我们不被允许回去。
She said, "Don't come back until dark."
她说：“天黑之前别回来。”
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes, exactly.
是的，完全正确。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We did not have the option to watch cartoons for more than a couple of minutes-
我们看动画片的时间不能超过几分钟——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right
右
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
after school.
放学后。
We were forbidden.
我们被禁止了。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So she could get peace, and we could get activity.
这样她才能得到平静，我们才能得到活动。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Exactly.
正是如此。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And younger people might not know, the television was called the boob tube-
年轻人可能不知道，电视被称为布布管——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
where a boob was an idiot, and that was the idea.
胸部就是白痴，这就是我们的想法。
That's where the term YouTube was a funny derivation of that.
这就是“YouTube”这个词的一个有趣的派生词。
Right.
正确的。
So now what kids are watching is lots of content.
所以现在孩子们看的内容很多。
We're all watching.
我们都在看着。
Lots of content on Instagram, TikTok, much of which is great.
Instagram、TikTok 上有很多内容，其中很多都很棒。
It's well-produced.
制作精良。
It's matched to our interests, and so are we addicted?
它符合我们的兴趣，那么我们会上瘾吗？
Yes.
是的。
Is it an addiction because it's offering better content than many other things in our life?
它是否会让人上瘾，因为它提供的内容比我们生活中的许多其他事物更好？
In some sense, yes.
从某种意义上说，是的。
So I'm a little torn on it.
所以我对此有点纠结。
The other thing that we've all noticed, though, is that people don't seem to be happy when they spend time scrolling on it.
然而，我们都注意到的另一件事是，当人们花时间滚动它时，他们似乎并不高兴。
They're kind of tempted to do it, but when they finish, they never feel like, "Wow, that was really a great experience." They're kind of drained from it.
他们有点想这么做，但当他们完成时，他们从来不会觉得，“哇，这真是一次很棒的经历。”他们有点筋疲力尽了。
So in that sense, it has the characteristics of an addiction where you keep going back to it even though you're not getting the high from it that you did the first time.
所以从这个意义上说，它具有成瘾的特征，即使你没有像第一次那样获得快感，你也会不断地重复它。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I will say, as long as I use it properly, I love social media and YouTube.
我会说，只要我使用得当，我喜欢社交媒体和YouTube。
I'm not just saying that as a political statement.
我这么说并不只是作为一个政治声明。
I teach on YouTube.
我在 YouTube 上教学。
I learn from you.
我向你学习。
I learn from others.
我向别人学习。
The other day, I wanted to learn about architecture.
前几天，我想学习建筑。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So during my workout, I put on a YouTube thing and just listened to it, like a basic history of certain architects in the United States.
所以在我锻炼的时候，我放了一个 YouTube 的东西，只是听它，就像美国某些建筑师的基本历史一样。
I was like, "I learned so much."
我当时想，“我学到了很多东西。”
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We couldn't do that when we were kids.
当我们还是孩子的时候，我们无法做到这一点。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Oh, I know.
哦，我知道。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It's awesome.
太棒了。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It's just awesome.
太棒了。
And then that set off in the algorithm some really good suggestions of some other things.
然后，这在算法中引发了一些其他一些非常好的建议。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And then when I didn't watch those, it offered some others, and I'm down the rabbit hole of stuff that I never, ever, ever would have encountered.
然后，当我没有看这些内容时，它提供了其他一些内容，我陷入了我从未、永远、永远不会遇到的东西的兔子洞中。
It's really cool.
真的很酷。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
This is precisely why all these kids have the opportunity, I think, to be so much smarter than we were.
我认为，这正是为什么所有这些孩子都有机会比我们聪明得多。
Yeah.
是的。
I'm just super enthusiastic about it.
我对此非常热情。
And now with AI, it can be even a whole different level.
现在有了人工智能，它甚至可以达到一个完全不同的水平。
I mentioned this thing before about using AI to debate, but just even in general, just saying, "Hey, I'm curious about this.
我之前提到过使用人工智能进行辩论，但只是一般而言，只是说，“嘿，我对此很好奇。
How does a flying buttress work?" or something.
飞扶壁是如何工作的？”或者什么的。
"Hey, ChatGPT.
“嘿，ChatGPT。
Hey, Claude." And you get the answer.
嘿，克劳德。”你就会得到答案。
Wow, what a great opportunity for kids growing up.
哇，这对孩子们的成长来说是多么好的机会啊。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Are you using YouTube to try and help you fix up these things in your house?
您是否正在使用 YouTube 来尝试帮助您解决家里的这些问题？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Oh, sure.
哦，当然。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Everything I fix, I learn how to do it on YouTube first.
我修复的所有内容都会先在 YouTube 上学习如何操作。
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Very cool.
非常酷。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Now I'm using AI to do it.
现在我正在使用人工智能来做到这一点。
I've got this lighting thing, and I couldn't figure out, so I took pictures, and I said, "What am I looking at here, and where's the box and the transformer?" Whatever, and it was pretty good at telling me what to do next.
我有这个照明的东西，但我不明白，所以我拍了照片，然后我说，“我在这里看什么，盒子和变压器在哪里？”不管怎样，它非常擅长告诉我下一步该做什么。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
That's awesome.
太棒了。
You have a company.
你有一家公司。
This is not a promotional, anytime I mention a company, but-
这不是促销，任何时候我提到一家公司，但是-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Actually, wait, can I pause?
事实上，等等，我可以暂停一下吗？
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Neosensory, I actually sold six months ago, so I don't have it anymore.
Neosensory，实际上我六个月前就卖掉了，所以我不再拥有它了。
Just-
只是——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Oh, okay
哦，好吧
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
All right.
好吧。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Had a company, yeah.
是的，有一家公司。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Congratulations.
恭喜。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Thank you.
谢谢你。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But Neosensory was a really neat idea of combining different senses.
但新感觉学确实是一个结合不同感官的绝妙想法。
People wearing bracelets so they could feel sounds, and so forth.
人们戴着手镯，这样他们就能感觉到声音等等。
Can anyone do this, even if they're not deficient in vision or in hearing, or in some other modality?
任何人都可以做到这一点，即使他们没有视力、听力或其他方面的缺陷？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
So I just got really interested in this topic about pushing information into the brain via unusual sensory channels.
所以我对这个关于通过不寻常的感觉通道将信息推送到大脑的主题非常感兴趣。
So for example, as you referenced, I built a wristband that captures sound and turns sound into patterns of vibration on the skin.
例如，正如您所提到的，我制作了一个腕带，可以捕获声音并将声音转化为皮肤上的振动模式。
This is for people who are deaf, and deaf people could learn how to hear that way.
这是针对聋人的，聋人可以学习如何以这种方式听到声音。
Why?
为什么？
Because this is the same thing that your inner ear, your cochlea does.
因为这与你的内耳、耳蜗的作用是一样的。
It's just capturing vibrations on the eardrum, and breaking that up into different frequencies, shipping it off to the brain in terms of spikes, just these little voltage spikes along nerves.
它只是捕捉耳膜上的振动，并将其分解成不同的频率，以尖峰的形式将其传送到大脑，这些小电压尖峰沿着神经。
We're doing the same thing, except we're pushing it in through the skin.
我们正在做同样的事情，只不过我们是将它推入皮肤。
It goes up the spinal cord to a different part of the brain, but the brain can figure that out.
它沿着脊髓到达大脑的不同部分，但大脑可以弄清楚这一点。
How?
如何？
Because it's doing correlations.
因为它正在做相关性。
It sees somebody's mouth move, it's feeling the sound, and it figures out how to hear that way.
它看到某人的嘴在动，感觉到声音，并弄清楚如何以这种方式听到声音。
Now, this idea of sensory substitution, I wish I'd invented that, but it actually has a long history, and the more I researched, I found out it goes back to the 1800s, when people first started asking, "Hey, can you push information into the brain in a weird way?" So the very first one was in the 1880s They had a little camera lens that would just detect light and dark, and it would get translated into a buzzing on your forehead.
现在，这种感觉替代的想法，我希望是我发明的，但它实际上有很长的历史，而且我研究得越多，我发现它可以追溯到 1800 年代，当时人们第一次开始问，“嘿，你能以一种奇怪的方式将信息推入大脑吗？”所以第一个是在 1880 年代，他们有一个小相机镜头，只能检测光明和黑暗，它会转化为你额头上的嗡嗡声。
And for people who were blind, they could tell, okay, well, there's a wall over here, and then there's an opening over here, and so on.
对于盲人来说，他们可以看出，好吧，这里有一堵墙，然后这里有一个开口，等等。
And then people worked on this.
然后人们开始研究这个。
The first major paper was in 1969 in "Nature." A guy named Paul Bach-y-Rita took blind people, and he put them in a dental chair, and he had this thing that would poke them in the back, a grid of 40 by 40 little solenoids that would poke you in the back.
第一篇重要论文发表于 1969 年的《自然》杂志上。一个名叫 Paul Bach-y-Rita 的人把盲人带到了牙科椅上，他有一个可以戳他们背部的东西，一个由 40 x 40 个小螺线管组成的网格，可以戳你的背部。
And he set up a video camera, and whatever the camera saw, you would feel that in your back.
他架起了一台摄像机，无论摄像机看到什么，你都会在你的背上感觉到。
So if it's looking at a triangle, you feel that triangle poked in your back.
所以，如果它看着一个三角形，你就会感觉到那个三角形戳到了你的背上。
If it's looking at a face, you feel the face.
如果它看着一张脸，你就会感觉到这张脸。
So blind people got pretty good at doing this, especially once he let them control the camera so they could move the camera any way they wanted.
所以盲人非常擅长这样做，特别是当他让他们控制相机以便他们可以以任何他们想要的方式移动相机时。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm.
嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
People got really good at being able to tell what was going on.
人们真的很擅长分辨正在发生的事情。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So it was following them around as they moved through the world?
所以当他们在世界各地移动时它就一直跟随他们？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
No, they were sitting in this dental chair.
不，他们坐在这把牙科椅上。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And that's exactly it.
就是这样。
In 1969, the technology was really clunky and heavy and got hot and whatever, and there was no way to make it portable in a meaningful way.
1969 年，这项技术确实很笨重，而且很热门，而且没有办法让它以有意义的方式便携。
But as time has gone on, we've been able to do that now.
但随着时间的推移，我们现在已经能够做到这一点了。
And so Paul Bach-y-Rita, he passed away some years ago, but his research has continued with something called the BrainPort, which is, again, for blind people.
保罗·巴赫·伊·丽塔（Paul Bach-y-Rita）几年前去世了，但他的研究仍在继续，名为 BrainPort，这又是为盲人设计的。
So with the BrainPort, the way this works is you're wearing this little camera on your head on glasses, and you've got this little electrical grid on your tongue.
因此，对于 BrainPort，其工作原理是，您将这个小摄像头戴在头上的眼镜上，并且您的舌头上有这个小电网。
And so whatever the camera is seeing, you feel that on your tongue.
所以无论相机看到什么，你都能在舌头上感受到。
It feels like pop rocks.
感觉就像流行摇滚。
So if I'm looking at the coffee cup in front of me, I'm feeling the outline of the coffee cup.
因此，如果我看着面前的咖啡杯，我就会感觉到咖啡杯的轮廓。
And blind people can get so good at this.
盲人也能在这方面做得很好。
They can do things like throw a ball into a basket or navigate a complex obstacle course.
他们可以做一些事情，例如将球扔进篮子或穿越复杂的障碍路线。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Whoa.
哇哦。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
It sounds crazy, but the thing to remember is the way you normally see is your eyeballs are these devices embedded in your skull here that are capturing photons and turning that into spikes that race into the darkness of your brain.
这听起来很疯狂，但要记住的是，你通常看到的方式是你的眼球，这些装置嵌入你的头骨中，捕获光子并将其转化为尖峰，进入你大脑的黑暗。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Electrical signals.
电信号。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Electrical signals, exactly.
确切地说，是电信号。
And so this is just turning what your tongue is feeling into spikes, these electrical signals that race into the darkness of your brain, and you can figure it out.
所以这只是把你舌头的感觉变成了尖峰，这些电信号冲进你大脑的黑暗中，你可以弄清楚它。
You can learn how to see that way.
你可以学习如何以这种方式看待。
And again, it's with correlation because you feel something with your fingers, maybe you hear something also, and so you're putting that together, and your brain says, "Oh, okay, I got it.
再说一次，它具有相关性，因为你用手指感觉到某些东西，也许你也听到一些东西，所以你把它们放在一起，你的大脑说，“哦，好吧，我明白了。
There's a visual thing out there in the world." And the really wacky part I'll just mention is that people using the BrainPort who, let's say, used to have sight and lost it, they will report it is like sight.
世界上有一种视觉事物。”我要提到的真正古怪的部分是，使用 BrainPort 的人，比如说，曾经有视力但失去了它，他们会报告说它就像视力一样。
They say, "I remember seeing, and this is like seeing," even though it's coming in through their tongue.
他们说，“我记得看到了，这就像看到了”，尽管这是通过他们的舌头进来的。
And with the Neosensory wristband that we built, I interviewed a guy after he'd been wearing it about six months, and I said, "Look, when you hear a dog bark, do you feel the buzzing on your wrist, and then you think, 'Okay, that must be a dog barking?'" He said, "No, no. I hear the dog bark out there," which sounds crazy, but obviously, that's the same crazy thing happening with our ears.
对于我们制造的新感觉腕带，我采访了一个戴了大约六个月的人，我说，“看，当你听到狗叫时，你是否感觉到手腕上有嗡嗡声，然后你想，‘好吧，那一定是狗叫？’”他说，“不，不。我听到狗在那里叫，”这听起来很疯狂，但显然，我们的耳朵也发生了同样疯狂的事情。
We've got this whole mechanism going on that we're very used to, and so we say, "Oh, of course the dog is out there," but in fact, it's all happening in here in the darkness of the skull.
我们已经习惯了整个机制，所以我们说，“哦，狗当然就在那里，”但事实上，这一切都发生在头骨的黑暗中。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I'd like to take a quick break and acknowledge one of our sponsors, Function.
我想稍微休息一下并感谢我们的赞助商之一 Function。
Last year, I became a Function member after searching for the most comprehensive approach to lab testing.
去年，在寻找最全面的实验室测试方法后，我成为了 Function 成员。
Function provides over 100 advanced lab tests that give you a key snapshot of your entire bodily health.
Function 提供 100 多项高级实验室测试，为您提供整个身体健康状况的关键快照。
This snapshot offers you with insights on your heart health, hormone health, immune functioning, nutrient levels, and much more.
此快照为您提供有关心脏健康、激素健康、免疫功能、营养水平等方面的见解。
They've also recently added tests for toxins, such as BPA exposure from harmful plastics, and tests for PFAS, or forever chemicals.
他们最近还增加了毒素测试，例如有害塑料中的 BPA 暴露，以及 PFAS 或永久化学物质的测试。
Function not only provides testing of over 100 biomarkers key to your physical and mental health, but it also analyzes these results and provides insights from top doctors who are expert in the relevant areas.
Function 不仅提供对您的身心健康至关重要的 100 多种生物标记物的测试，而且还分析这些结果并提供相关领域专家的顶级医生的见解。
For example, in one of my first tests with Function, I learned that I had elevated levels of mercury in my blood.
例如，在我第一次使用 Function 进行测试时，我发现我的血液中汞含量升高。
Function not only helped me detect that but offered insights into how best to reduce my mercury levels, which included limiting my tuna consumption, I'd been eating a lot of tuna, while also making an effort to eat more leafy greens and supplementing with NAC, N-acetylcysteine, both of which can support glutathione production and detoxification.
功能不仅帮助我发现了这一点，还提供了如何最好地降低汞含量的见解，其中包括限制我的金枪鱼消费，我一直在吃大量金枪鱼，同时还努力多吃绿叶蔬菜并补充 NAC、N-乙酰半胱氨酸，这两者都可以支持谷胱甘肽的产生和解毒。
And I should say, by taking a second Function test, that approach worked.
我应该说，通过进行第二次功能测试，这种方法奏效了。
Comprehensive blood testing is vitally important.
全面的血液检测至关重要。
There are so many things related to your mental and physical health that can only be detected in a blood test.
有很多与您的心理和身体健康相关的事情只能通过血液检查来检测。
The problem is blood testing has always been very expensive and complicated.
问题是血液检测一直非常昂贵且复杂。
In contrast, I've been super impressed by Function's simplicity and at the level of cost.
相比之下，Function 的简单性和成本水平给我留下了深刻的印象。
It is very affordable.
这是非常实惠的。
As a consequence, I decided to join their scientific advisory board, and I'm thrilled that they're sponsoring the podcast.
因此，我决定加入他们的科学顾问委员会，我很高兴他们赞助了这个播客。
If you'd like to try Function, you can go to functionhealth.com/huberman.
如果您想尝试 Function，可以访问 functionhealth.com/huberman。
Function currently has a wait list of over 250,000 people, but they're offering early access to Huberman podcast listeners.
Function 目前有超过 250,000 人的等待名单，但他们正在为 Huberman 播客听众提供早期访问服务。
Again, that's functionhealth.com/huberman to get early access to Function.
同样，可以通过 functionhealth.com/huberman 提前访问 Function。
Recently, I've been listening to a book that I read previously, which I love.
最近在听一本以前读过的书，很喜欢。
By the way, I love "Livewire."
顺便说一句，我喜欢“Livewire”。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Thank you.
谢谢你。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I'm not just saying.
我不只是说说而已。
I've read it three times-
我读了三遍了——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Thank you
谢谢你
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
when it came out.
当它出来的时候。
I need to revisit it.
我需要重新审视一下。
I like to reread books.
我喜欢重读书籍。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I believe in rereading books.
我相信重读书籍。
Ed Yong wrote a book called "An Immense World." He's not a scientist, but he's a science writer, and it's about different sensory modalities that different animals use.
艾德·勇写了一本书，名为《广阔的世界》。他不是科学家，但他是科普作家，这是关于不同动物使用的不同感官方式的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And for an animal lover like me, I found it really spectacular.
对于像我这样的动物爱好者来说，我发现这真的很壮观。
But he says something that I totally agree with, which is that we shouldn't think so much about whether or not a given animal is good at smell and bad at vision, or really good hearing.
但他说了一些我完全同意的话，那就是我们不应该过多地考虑某种动物是否擅长嗅觉但视力不佳，或者是否真的有很好的听力。
The valuations of these things are really tough.
这些东西的估值真的很难。
With visual acuity, we can do it, like an eagle resolution versus human resolution.
有了视敏度，我们就可以做到这一点，就像鹰的分辨率与人类的分辨率一样。
But when it comes to things like smell or touch, the better question, he says, and I agree, is how much does a given organism or person rely on a given sense will tell you their abilities with that sense.
但当涉及到气味或触觉之类的东西时，更好的问题是，一个特定的有机体或人在多大程度上依赖于一种特定的感觉来告诉你他们用这种感觉的能力，他说，我同意。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
There are some bounds on that, right?
这有一些限制，对吧？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I can't echolocate like a bat, but I'm guessing that if I had to, in order to navigate an environment, I could learn to echolocate, and I think there are individuals who have learned to echolocate.
我不能像蝙蝠一样进行回声定位，但我猜如果我必须这样做，为了在一个环境中导航，我可以学习回声定位，而且我认为有些人已经学会了回声定位。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Exactly.
正是如此。
In fact, the term was coined in 1930 in a science paper this gentleman wrote called "Echolocation in Bats and Blind Men." And blind people, since almost 100 years now, can do this thing where they use clicks of their tongue or the tap of their cane or any kind of sound that they make, and they listen very carefully for what's bouncing back to them, and they can echolocate.
事实上，这个术语是 1930 年这位先生在一篇名为《蝙蝠和盲人的回声定位》的科学论文中创造的。盲人，从近 100 年前起，就可以做到这一点，他们可以用舌头的声音、手杖的敲击声或发出的任何声音来做到这一点，他们会非常仔细地聆听反射回来的声音，然后他们就可以进行回声定位。
It also turns out that seeing people can echolocate if it is relevant to them.
事实证明，如果与人相关的话，看到人就能进行回声定位。
If you really want to put the effort into it, you can learn how to do it.
如果你真的想付出努力，你可以学习如何去做。
Again, this just points to the plasticity of the brain, how good it is at doing this.
再说一次，这只是表明大脑的可塑性，它在这方面有多擅长。
Some years ago, I suggested this Mr. Potato Head theory about thinking about the brain, which is whatever senses you plug in to a brain, it'll figure out what to do with that information.
几年前，我提出了关于思考大脑的土豆头先生理论，即你将任何感觉插入大脑，它就会弄清楚如何处理这些信息。
And so when we look across the animal kingdom, we find all kinds of very weird stuff, not only eagle eyes and so on, but we find many animals, like let's say snakes, they pick up on infrared range of vision, which is invisible to us.
因此，当我们环顾动物王国时，我们会发现各种非常奇怪的东西，不仅是鹰眼等，而且我们还发现许多动物，例如蛇，它们接收我们看不见的红外视觉范围。
You've got lots of fish that pick up on perturbations in electrical fields.
有很多鱼会受到电场扰动的影响。
They have electroreception.
他们有电感受能力。
You have this animal called the star-nosed mole, which has this nose with 22 fingers on it, and it feels its way through these tunnels with these 22 fingers, this weird thing.
有一种叫做星鼻鼹鼠的动物，它的鼻子上有 22 个手指，它用这 22 个手指在这些隧道中摸索，这是一个奇怪的东西。
Lots of birds and cows and insects have magnetoreception, so they can pick up on the magnetic field of the Earth, and they can navigate that way.
许多鸟类、牛和昆虫都有磁感受能力，因此它们可以接收到地球的磁场，并可以通过这种方式导航。
For years, I was staring at this stuff and figuring out how in the world does evolution happen so quickly that you can do all this.
多年来，我一直盯着这些东西，想知道世界上的进化是如何发生得如此之快，以至于你可以做到这一切。
And this is what led me to this theory that Mother Nature really only had to invent the brain once, figure out the principles of brain operation.
这就是让我得出这样一个理论的原因：大自然实际上只需要发明一次大脑，弄清楚大脑运作的原理。
And after that, she could spend all of her time tweaking the genetics to make all these weird peripheral devices that you plug in, and it's all plug and play.
在那之后，她可以花所有的时间调整基因来制造所有这些奇怪的外围设备，你可以插入，而且都是即插即用的。
Whatever weird thing you come up with, you just say, "Okay, cool.
无论你想出什么奇怪的东西，你只需说：“好吧，酷。
I'm going to plug this in, and I'm sure the brain will figure this out." And it always does, and that's exactly why we can do sensory substitution and, by the way, sensory enhancement or sensory addition, where you can add completely new senses.
我要把它插上，我相信大脑会解决这个问题。”它总是如此，这正是我们可以进行感官替代的原因，顺便说一句，感官增强或感官添加，您可以在其中添加全新的感官。
One example is my colleagues at Osnabrück built this belt that you wear that's got vibratory motors all around it, and it just has a little digital compass on it, so it can tell where north is.
一个例子是我在奥斯纳布吕克的同事制造了一条你佩戴的腰带，它周围有振动电机，上面只有一个小数字指南针，所以它可以告诉北方在哪里。
So whichever direction north is on your body, you feel that motor buzzing.
因此，无论您身体朝哪个方向朝北，您都会感觉到电机嗡嗡作响。
So it might be on my left hip if north is that way, but if I turn around, I'll feel that on my right hip, and so on.
所以如果朝北的话，它可能在我的左臀部，但如果我转身，我会感觉到它在我的右臀部，依此类推。
And people get really good at being able to detect which way north is, just as one example.
举个例子，人们非常擅长检测北方的方向。
It's really easy to add new senses, like magnetoreception in this case, and people can figure this stuff out.
添加新的感官真的很容易，比如本例中的磁感受，人们可以弄清楚这些东西。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So cool.
太酷了。
As a fan of the X-Men, in particular, you mentioned Magneto, but in general, different mutations give rise to different abilities.
作为X战警的粉丝，您特别提到了万磁王，但总的来说，不同的突变会产生不同的能力。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
That whole series of the X-Men is really about extremes of genetic mutations giving abilities.
《X战警》的整个系列实际上是关于赋予能力的极端基因突变。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And there's some social discussion in there, too.
那里也有一些社会讨论。
But let's talk about dreaming because you mentioned that everything that we perceive as out there, beyond our reach, is occurring by virtue of electrical and chemical events in our brain.
但是我们来谈谈梦，因为你提到我们所感知到的一切超出我们能力范围的事物都是通过我们大脑中的电和化学事件而发生的。
It's all vaulted in there.
一切都拱形在那里。
Dreams are a unique situation where typically people's eyes are closed when they sleep, and they're often paralyzed during REM sleep, and yet we have very visual dreams.
梦是一种独特的情况，通常人们在睡觉时眼睛是闭着的，并且在快速眼动睡眠期间通常会瘫痪，但我们却有非常视觉化的梦。
I know you talked about this in "Livewire," but please share with us what you think is the origin of the visual component of dreams.
我知道您在“Livewire”中谈到过这一点，但请与我们分享您认为梦的视觉成分的起源是什么。
And I'm curious if it relates back to the visual imagery continuum that you mentioned earlier.
我很好奇它是否与您之前提到的视觉图像连续体有关。
Do some people just tend to have more visual dreams and other people don't?
是否有些人往往有更多的视觉梦想，而其他人则不然？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Let me answer that second part first.
让我先回答第二部分。
We're not sure about that.
我们对此并不确定。
I ask people all the time who are aphantasic or hyperphantasic about their dreams.
我总是向那些缺乏幻想或幻想过多的人询问他们的梦想。
It's hard to tell.
很难说。
I don't see something obvious there, which is to say when there's dreams, you're getting this activity blasted into your visual cortex, so it's like vision.
我在那里没有看到明显的东西，也就是说，当有梦时，你的视觉皮层就会受到这种活动的影响，所以它就像视觉一样。
So let me back up to answer the question about my new theory about why we dream, because this has everything to do with brain plasticity.
因此，让我回来回答关于我们为什么做梦的新理论的问题，因为这与大脑可塑性密切相关。
So here's where this got started.
这就是事情开始的地方。
By about 2013, some of our colleagues at Harvard did this experiment where they put people in the scanner, and they blindfolded them tightly, and they were looking at what was going on in the brain and with touch and with sounds.
大约 2013 年，我们哈佛大学的一些同事做了这个实验，他们把人放在扫描仪中，紧紧地蒙住他们的眼睛，通过触摸和声音来观察大脑中发生的事情。
And it turns out that if you're blindfolded, after about an hour, you start seeing a little bit of activity in the visual cortex when you are touched or when you hear something.
事实证明，如果你被蒙住眼睛，大约一个小时后，当你被触摸或听到什么东西时，你就会开始看到视觉皮层有一点活动。
Now, this was crazy because we know that if somebody goes blind, hearing and touch will take over that territory, but we thought that was on the scale of years.
现在，这很疯狂，因为我们知道如果有人失明，听觉和触觉将接管该领域，但我们认为这是数年的规模。
And here what they were demonstrating is that within 60 to 90 minutes, you start seeing little blips of activity.
他们在这里展示的是，在 60 到 90 分钟内，您开始看到活动的小亮点。
Why?
为什么？
It's because you've got all this cross-modal wiring.
这是因为您拥有所有这些跨模式接线。
In other words, you've got neurons, let's say, in the auditory cortex that actually reach all the way over to the visual cortex, and same with touch neurons and so on.
换句话说，听觉皮层中的神经元实际上一直延伸到视觉皮层，触觉神经元也是如此。
These are normally silent.
这些通常是沉默的。
They don't normally do anything, but they are ready.
他们通常不做任何事情，但他们已经准备好了。
They're like silent sentinels that say, "Hey, just in case this territory stops getting used, I'm taking over." Okay, so here's what my student and I realized is that because we live on a planet that rotates into darkness every night, the visual system is at a unique disadvantage because when it's dark, you can still hear and smell and touch and taste, but you can't see.
他们就像沉默的哨兵，说：“嘿，以防万一这片领地不再被使用，我要接管。”好吧，我和我的学生意识到，因为我们生活在一个每晚都会旋转到黑暗的星球上，所以视觉系统处于独特的劣势，因为当天黑时，你仍然可以听到、闻到、触摸到和尝到，但你看不到。
And obviously, I'm talking about evolutionary time before the invention of lights, which was the last nanosecond of evolutionary history.
显然，我谈论的是光发明之前的进化时间，这是进化历史的最后纳秒。
It was really dark at night, and you can't see.
晚上真的很黑，什么也看不见。
And so, you go into the corner of a cave and curl up and go to sleep.
于是，你走进一个山洞的角落，蜷缩起来睡觉。
But the key is that the visual system was in danger of getting taken over during this long, extended period of darkness.
但关键是，在这段漫长的黑暗时期里，视觉系统面临着被接管的危险。
So what we hypothesized is that dreams are the brain's way of defending the visual cortex against takeover from the other senses.
因此，我们假设梦是大脑保护视觉皮层免遭其他感官接管的方式。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm.
嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
And when you look at the circuitry, it's this very specific circuitry.
当你观察电路时，你会发现这是一个非常特殊的电路。
It starts in the midbrain, goes to an area called the lateral geniculate nucleus, and plugs straight into the primary visual cortex, and that's it.
它从中脑开始，到达称为外侧膝状核的区域，并直接插入初级视觉皮层，就是这样。
Every 90 minutes, you have this volley of activity that just slams into the primary visual cortex.
每 90 分钟，你就会经历一系列的活动，冲击初级视觉皮层。
It doesn't go anywhere else in the brain.
它不会进入大脑的其他任何地方。
And so every 90 minutes, you've got this automated way of making activity happen there, and because we are visual creatures, we see that as a dream.
因此，每隔 90 分钟，你就会有这种自动化的方式让活动在那里发生，因为我们是视觉生物，所以我们将其视为梦想。
We see a whole story, and because the brain is a storyteller, we impose plot, meaning, and we have emotion that goes with that.
我们看到一个完整的故事，因为大脑是一个讲故事的人，所以我们强加了情节、意义，并且我们有与之相伴的情感。
But the key is this is the brain's way of defending territory in the dark.
但关键是这是大脑在黑暗中保卫领地的方式。
And so what we did then is we examined, very carefully, 25 species of primates and looked at their brain plasticity.
所以我们当时所做的是非常仔细地检查了 25 种灵长类动物，并观察了它们的大脑可塑性。
And you can measure this with different proxies like when they start to walk and when they get to reproduction age and so on.
你可以用不同的指标来衡量这一点，比如他们什么时候开始走路，什么时候到达生育年龄等等。
And some creatures like the gray mouse lemur, which is a type of monkey, they are born, let's just say, pre-programmed.
有些生物，比如灰鼠狐猴，它是猴子的一种，它们是天生的，可以说是预先编程的。
They pop out, they're really quick to wean and reach juvenile age and reproduce and so on.
它们会突然出现，断奶很快，达到幼年年龄并繁殖等等。
Whereas you look at Homo sapiens, we're super slow.
当你观察智人时，你会发现我们的速度非常慢。
We've got these extended infancies, and we take a long time to learn how to walk and so on.
我们有这些延长的婴儿期，我们花了很长时间来学习如何走路等等。
Okay, because we're very plastic, we end up in the world half-baked.
好吧，因为我们的可塑性很强，所以我们最终会进入一个半生不熟的世界。
Okay, well, it turns out if you plot how much REM sleep each of these animals get, the more plastic the animal, like Homo sapiens, we've got tons of REM sleep.
好吧，如果你计算出这些动物的快速眼动睡眠时间，就会发现，动物的可塑性越高，比如智人，我们就有大量的快速眼动睡眠。
And by the way, this is mostly in infancy.
顺便说一句，这主要是在婴儿期。
Infants spend 50% of their time in REM sleep.
婴儿 50% 的时间处于快速眼动睡眠中。
As you get older and your brain becomes less plastic, you have a drop-off in REM sleep.
随着年龄的增长，大脑的可塑性逐渐减弱，快速眼动睡眠就会减少。
And by the way, when you look across animal species of all types, you find that the animals that are born with extended infancies need to figure out how to do stuff in the world.
顺便说一句，当你观察所有类型的动物物种时，你会发现出生时婴儿期较长的动物需要弄清楚如何在世界上做事。
They all have much more REM sleep, like eight times more REM sleep than animals that are born essentially mature, like cows and giraffes and zebras and whatever.
它们的快速眼动睡眠时间都多得多，比生来就成熟的动物（如牛、长颈鹿、斑马等）的快速眼动睡眠时间多八倍。
They show up, they start walking in 40 minutes, and so on.
他们出现，40 分钟后开始步行，等等。
They have much less REM sleep than we do.
他们的快速眼动睡眠时间比我们少得多。
So anyway, this is our hypothesis about why we dream, and it's the only hypothesis that makes quantitative predictions across species.
所以无论如何，这就是我们关于为什么做梦的假设，也是跨物种进行定量预测的唯一假设。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Super interesting.
超级有趣。
And we know that REM-associated dreams are much more emotionally elaborate than deep sleep dreams.
我们知道，与快速眼动睡眠相关的梦比深度睡眠梦在情感上更加复杂。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah, and the important part here, of course, is they're more visually elaborate.
是的，当然，这里重要的部分是它们在视觉上更加精致。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
There are dreams that people can have in deep sleep.
人们在深度睡眠中可以做梦。
Obviously, the way that this gets studied is you rouse a sleeper and you say, "Hey, what were you just dreaming about?
显然，研究这个问题的方法是你叫醒一个熟睡的人，然后说：“嘿，你刚刚梦到了什么？
What were you just thinking about?" And so if you do that during REM sleep where their eyes are moving around, they'll say, "Whoa, I was just riding across a meadow on a camel, and this was what was going on." If you wake somebody during other stages of sleep, deep sleep, they sometimes have something like, "Well, I was just considering this feeling I had of whatever," but it's not as visual.
你刚刚在想什么？”因此，如果你在快速眼动睡眠期间这样做，他们的眼睛会四处移动，他们会说，“哇，我刚刚骑着骆驼穿过草地，这就是发生的事情。”如果你在睡眠的其他阶段（深度睡眠）叫醒某人，他们有时会有这样的感觉，“好吧，我只是在考虑我对任何事物的这种感觉”，但它并不那么视觉化。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
It's not as rich.
没那么富有。
By the way, people who are blind still have dreams, but their dreams are not visual.
顺便说一句，盲人仍然有梦想，但他们的梦想不是视觉的。
They have a dream like, "Oh, I was feeling my way around the living room, but all the furniture was rearranged, and then I felt in the corner, and it was a jaguar, and the jaguar started chasing me, and I was trying to get away from it," and so on.
他们有这样的梦：“哦，我在客厅里摸索着，但所有的家具都被重新布置了，然后我摸到了角落里，那是一只美洲虎，美洲虎开始追我，我试图摆脱它，”等等。
But it's sound, it's touch, it's things like that.
但它是声音，是触觉，诸如此类的东西。
Why?
为什么？
Because their occipital lobe at the back of their head is not visual, it's accounting for these other things.
因为他们后脑勺的枕叶不可见，所以它可以解释这些其他事情。
So the dreaming circuitry, which is very ancient, is just blasting activity into that area of the occipital lobe, and so they experience whatever that correlates with.
因此，非常古老的做梦回路只是将活动刺激到枕叶的该区域，因此他们会经历与之相关的任何事情。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So cool.
太酷了。
I want to move on to questions that I have about science and the law, but before I do, I was told by a very talented magician mentalist recently that there's a guy down in Brazil who does magic tricks for blind people using only the auditory domain.
我想继续讨论有关科学和法律的问题，但在此之前，最近一位非常有才华的魔术师心灵学家告诉我，巴西有一个人只使用听觉领域为盲人表演魔术。
And apparently, if you blindfold yourself and you spend a bit of time around him, you can start to hear these magic tricks.
显然，如果你蒙住自己的眼睛并在他身边呆上一段时间，你就可以开始听到这些魔术。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And they're not just illusions of sound leaping.
它们不仅仅是声音跳跃的幻觉。
And so I said, "Well, give me an example." He said, "You have to just experience this." This is something we should meet this person.
所以我说：“好吧，给我举个例子。”他说：“你必须经历这一点。”这是我们应该见到这个人的事情。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
We should do this.
我们应该这样做。
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We should meet this person.
我们应该去见见这个人。
Just a complete perceptual bend to try and get one's head around that.
只是一个完全的感知弯曲，试图让人们的头脑绕过这一点。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
By the way, counselors who deal with these blind students at these blind schools, they're generally encouraged to blindfold themselves for seven days, and they absolutely start having totally different experiences.
顺便说一句，在这些盲人学校与这些盲人学生打交道的辅导员通常会鼓励他们蒙住自己的眼睛7天，他们绝对开始有完全不同的经历。
Their brain starts changing.
他们的大脑开始发生变化。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I still won't do one of those darkness cave retreats.
我仍然不会参加任何一场黑暗洞穴静修。
People have tried to persuade me to do those.
人们试图说服我这样做。
I have no interest.
我没有兴趣。
I love sunlight.
我喜欢阳光。
I want to keep my circadian rhythm entrainment intact.
我想保持我的昼夜节律完整。
If that's what people want to do...
如果这就是人们想要做的...
Also, I heard about someone going to do it, and then they flipped on the lights at the end, they went back in to see it, and the place was covered with spiders.
另外，我听说有人要这么做，然后他们在最后打开灯，他们回去看，那个地方布满了蜘蛛。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
No.
不。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So clean the place up.
所以把这个地方打扫干净。
Science and the law.
科学与法律。
Earlier, we were talking about how under stressful circumstances, frame rate of perception is not increased, but memory density is higher.
前面我们谈到，在有压力的情况下，感知帧率没有增加，但内存密度更高。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Can I therefore take the leap that, let's just say, and these are usually tragic circumstances, if there are two individuals, let's limit it to two, for sake of example, in a high-stress, highly traumatic interaction, but one is more stressed than the other.
因此，我可以大胆地说，这些通常是悲剧性的情况，如果有两个人，让我们将其限制为两个人，例如，在高压力、高创伤性的互动中，但一个人比另一个人承受更大的压力。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Maybe they're the victim In that case, that their density of memory is higher and therefore, even though there's a perceptual difference, perhaps more accurate than for the person who was calmer.
也许他们是受害者，在这种情况下，他们的记忆密度更高，因此，即使存在感知差异，也许比冷静的人更准确。
Or is there a threshold at which stress limits memory and therefore the person who is calmer has a more accurate memory?
或者是否存在压力限制记忆的阈值，因此越平静的人记忆越准确？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Great question.
很好的问题。
Well, it turns out, first of all, what victims often have is what's called weapon focus.
好吧，事实证明，首先，受害者经常拥有的是所谓的武器焦点。
So if the other person has a knife or a gun, that's all they remember.
因此，如果对方有刀或枪，他们就只记得这些。
"Describe the guy's face." "I don't remember the guy's face because I was staring at the gun." So it turns out that what they pay attention to is sort of the wrong thing for forensics purposes.
“描述一下这个人的脸。” “我不记得那个人的脸了，因为我一直盯着枪。”所以事实证明，他们所关注的事情对于取证目的来说是错误的。
That's number one.
这是第一。
But number two is this much deeper issue that even amygdala memories are not necessarily accurate.
但第二个问题是，即使是杏仁核的记忆也不一定准确。
So, our colleague Elizabeth Phelps did this experiment right after 9/11 in 2001.
因此，我们的同事伊丽莎白·菲尔普斯 (Elizabeth Phelps) 在 2001 年 9/11 事件之后立即进行了这项实验。
Shortly after the event happened, she went and interviewed lots of people in Downtown and Midtown New York about what they saw on September 11th, and she was smart enough to interview them also about what they remembered from September 10th, what they ate for breakfast that day and so on.
事件发生后不久，她就去纽约市中心和中城采访了很多人，了解他们在9月11日的所见所闻，而且她很聪明，还采访了他们对9月10日的记忆，当天早餐吃了什么等等。
Okay.
好的。
She then found them three months later.
三个月后她找到了他们。
She followed up a year later.
一年后她跟进了。
She ended up doing that 10 years later as well.
10年后她也这么做了。
What they found is that the traumatic memories of 9/11, even those are amygdala memories, they drifted just as much as the memories of what they ate for lunch on September 10th.
他们发现，9/11 的创伤记忆，即使是杏仁核记忆，也和 9 月 10 日午餐的记忆一样，发生了漂移。
And so an unfortunate fact for the law is that memories are not accurate.
因此，对于法律来说，一个不幸的事实是记忆并不准确。
They drift.
他们随波逐流。
Every time we check in on memories, we're changing them, and it becomes like the operator game where one person says something in the other person's ear and the next person repeats that, and the next person repeats that.
每次我们检查记忆时，我们都会改变它们，这就像操作员游戏一样，一个人在另一个人的耳边说了什么，下一个人重复一遍，下一个人重复一遍。
There's a sense in which we're always playing the operator game with ourselves.
从某种意义上说，我们总是在和自己玩操作员游戏。
Each time we pull up a memory, it's changing, and it gets modified and colored by new information that we have.
每次我们提取记忆时，它都会发生变化，并且它会被我们拥有的新信息所修改和着色。
So that's the bad news for the legal system.
这对法律体系来说是个坏消息。
And so the legal system has gotten really smart about this over the last 30 years and tried to make sure that they take care of things that happen, let's say, with eyewitness identification.
因此，在过去的 30 年里，法律体系在这方面变得非常聪明，并试图确保他们能够处理发生的事情，比如说，通过目击者身份识别。
So one thing is police suggestibility.
所以一件事是警察的暗示性。
So if I'm looking at a lineup and I say, "Gosh, I think that's the guy," and the police officer says, "Yeah, I think that's the guy.
所以如果我看着一个阵容，我说，“天哪，我想就是那个人，”然后警察说，“是的，我想就是那个人。
I agree with you on that." Then what happens is when I go to court three months later, I say to the judge, "Yeah, I'm 100% confident," even though at the time of the lineup, I wasn't confident at all, but I come to think I am.
我同意你的观点。”然后发生的事情是，当我三个月后上法庭时，我对法官说，“是的，我100%有信心”，尽管在阵容时我一点也不自信，但我开始认为我是。
There are many, many ways that things get implemented so that we can try to work around how lousy our memories are.
有很多很多的方法可以实现这些事情，这样我们就可以尝试解决我们的记忆力有多差的问题。
One thing is separating witnesses right away because if you and I witness a crime, and then you say, "Oh my God, I think the guy had long hair." And I say, "No, no, I think it was short hair," or whatever.
一件事是立即将证人分开，因为如果你和我目睹了犯罪，然后你说，“天哪，我认为那个人有长头发。”我说，“不，不，我认为这是短发，”或者其他什么。
We're influencing each other's memory, and the things that we say end up changing what the other believes to be true.
我们正在影响彼此的记忆，而我们所说的事情最终会改变对方所相信的事实。
One of the classes I teach is, The Brain and the Law, and I do this thing every year.
我教的课程之一是“大脑与法律”，我每年都会做这件事。
I sort of hate to give this away on a podcast, but here's what I do.
我有点讨厌在播客上透露这一点，但这就是我所做的。
I'm teaching the class and a woman busts into the back of the classroom, starts screaming at me, says, "Are you Dr. Eagleman?" I say, "Yeah." I say, "Excuse me, I'm teaching a class." She says, "I've been sending you emails, and you haven't written back," and blah, blah.
我正在上课，一个女人冲进教室后面，开始对我尖叫，说：“你是伊格曼博士吗？”我说：“是的。”我说：“对不起，我正在教课。”她说，“我一直在给你发电子邮件，但你还没有回信，”等等等等。
I say, "Excuse me, I am teaching a class.
我说：“对不起，我正在教课。
I'm happy to talk to you afterwards.
我很高兴之后能和你谈谈。
I'm sorry I don't get to all my emails." And she says, "Well, I'm going to wait for you." Okay, so then I keep teaching the class, and then after 20 minutes or so, I say to the class, "Look, I'm going to call security, but I don't know what she looked like.
很抱歉我没有收到所有电子邮件。”她说：“好吧，我会等你。”好吧，然后我继续教班级，然后大约 20 分钟后，我对班级说，“听着，我要打电话给保安，但我不知道她长什么样。
I need you guys to write down what you remember about her." I said, "All I remember is that she had a big mole on her left cheek, and that's all I was able to really see." And so everyone writes down their stuff.
我需要你们写下你们对她的记忆。”我说：“我只记得她的左脸颊上有一颗大痣，这是我真正能看到的。”所以每个人都写下他们的东西。
Now, not surprisingly, eyewitness identification is terrible.
现在，毫不奇怪，目击者识别非常糟糕。
Everyone comes up with extraordinarily different descriptions of what the woman looked like.
每个人对这个女人的长相都有不同的描述。
One thing they tend to have in common is this mole on left cheek, which I made up.
他们的一个共同点是左脸颊上的这颗痣，是我化妆的。
The woman doesn't have that, but it's a demonstration that planting something, even accidentally, in my case on purpose, will influence your memory of what you think happened.
这个女人没有这个，但这证明了种植一些东西，即使是无意的，在我的例子中是故意的，也会影响你对你认为发生的事情的记忆。
Obviously, it's an actor that I hire every year, but it demonstrates how poorly we remember things.
显然，这是我每年都会聘请的演员，但这表明我们对事情的记忆力有多么差。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
How does the legal system deal with, forget eyewitness account, just of potential perpetrators, but just recollection in general?
法律制度如何处理（忘记目击者的叙述）仅处理潜在的肇事者，而仅处理一般的回忆？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Well, this has been all the way up to the Supreme Court because some guy was accused.
好吧，这件事一直到最高法院，因为有人被指控。
He got sent to jail based on the eyewitness testimony of a woman who was up on the second floor seeing him from there, and it was dark out, and he said, "Look, that can't be reliable eyewitness testimony." So this went to the Supreme Court, and they said, "Look, sorry, but we can't guarantee reliable eyewitness testimony, and if we were to ever try to legislate that, that would ruin most court cases because most things are predicated on eyewitness testimony." So what the legal system tries to do is just educate jurors about this, about how seriously to take it.
根据一名在二楼的妇女的目击证词，他被送进了监狱，当时外面很黑，他说：“看，这不可能是可靠的目击者证词。”因此，这件事提交给了最高法院，他们说：“抱歉，我们不能保证可靠的目击者证词，如果我们试图立法，那将毁掉大多数法庭案件，因为大多数事情都是以目击者证词为基础的。”因此，法律体系试图做的只是教育陪审员了解这一点，了解如何认真对待它。
And by the way, I should mention, unfortunately, people are very swayed by this, jurors are.
顺便说一句，我应该提到，不幸的是，人们对此非常摇摆不定，陪审员也是如此。
Meaning, a scientist might get up and say, "Look, there's this information or that," but then some eyewitness comes up on the stand and says, "Look, I don't know about all that science stuff, but I know what I saw," and the jury is swayed by that.
意思是，一位科学家可能会站起来说，“看，有这个或那个信息”，但随后一些目击者出现在证人席上说，“看，我不知道所有这些科学知识，但我知道我看到了什么，”陪审团就会受到这一点的影响。
So it's not easy to educate jurors on this because people fundamentally, even after education, feel like, okay, but I know that my memory is like a video camera.
因此，对陪审员进行这方面的教育并不容易，因为人们从根本上来说，即使在接受过教育之后，也会感觉，好吧，但我知道我的记忆就像一台摄像机。
So anyway, but that's one thing the legal system tries to do and tries not to take it as gospel.
无论如何，但这是法律体系试图做的一件事，并试图不把它当作福音。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Are kids versus adults more prone to making up stories under these circumstances?
在这种情况下，孩子与成人相比是否更容易编造故事？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Exactly right.
完全正确。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I think that I, like most, I'm not going to speak for most people.
我想我和大多数人一样，不会代表大多数人说话。
I assume that kids tell the truth.
我认为孩子们说的是实话。
I mean, kids don't always tell the truth, but that they don't understand all the incentives systems around lying that some adults do.
我的意思是，孩子们并不总是说实话，但他们并不像一些成年人那样理解关于说谎的所有激励系统。
And so I think we tend to believe what kids say.
所以我认为我们倾向于相信孩子们所说的话。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Oh, but kids are actually more susceptible to memory manipulation.
哦，但是孩子们实际上更容易受到记忆操纵的影响。
So Elizabeth Loftus at Irvine ran these studies years ago where she...
因此，欧文的伊丽莎白·洛夫特斯 (Elizabeth Loftus) 几年前就进行了这些研究，她……
Sorry, this is slightly different, but what she's doing in these cases is she says to someone, "Hey, I talked to your parents." She actually did talk to the person's parent, and she says, "I found out a story from when you were younger about the time you got lost in the mall, and you were found by this woman in a red hat who then found your parents," and so on.
抱歉，这略有不同，但在这些情况下她所做的是她对某人说：“嘿，我和你的父母谈过了。”她实际上确实和这个人的父母谈过，她说，“我发现了一个故事，是你年轻的时候在商场里迷路的时候，你被一个戴红帽子的女人发现了，然后她找到了你的父母，”等等。
And it turns out she can make these stories completely up, and people will come to believe these.
事实证明，她可以把这些故事完全编造出来，人们就会相信这些。
And when she interviews them a week later, that is just part of the fact of their life resume, is that they were lost in the mall and found with this woman in the red hat and so on.
一周后，当她采访他们时，这只是他们生活简历中事实的一部分，那就是他们在商场里迷路了，然后被发现和这个戴红帽子的女人在一起等等。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
That has huge implications for therapy to unearth repressed memories and so-called repressed memories.
这对于发掘压抑记忆和所谓的压抑记忆的治疗具有巨大的意义。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Exactly.
正是如此。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Maybe we need dogs who are completely unbiased to evaluate the veracity of some of these claims.
也许我们需要完全公正的狗来评估其中一些说法的真实性。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Well, here's what I think.
嗯，这就是我的想法。
Look, you and I grew up in a slightly different world where if I count the number of childhood photos that I have, that I see, I've got little landmarks every couple of years.
看，你和我在一个稍微不同的世界里长大，如果我数一下我拥有的、我看到的童年照片的数量，我每隔几年就会有一些小地标。
Oh, that was me at eight years old standing in front of my house in Albuquerque, and that was me at 10 years old, and so on.
哦，那是我八岁时站在阿尔伯克基我的房子前面，那是我十岁时，等等。
But now, we have an Alexa in our kitchen, and it's constantly cycling through the pictures of my kids who see that every day.
但现在，我们的厨房里有一个 Alexa，它会不断地循环播放我孩子们每天看到的照片。
They say, "Oh, that was me a few years ago.
他们说：“哦，那是几年前的我。
That was me last month," and so on.
那是上个月的我，”等等。
I think kids are now much more tightly tied to their memory in a way that might prove very useful.
我认为孩子们现在与他们的记忆联系得更加紧密，这种方式可能非常有用。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Unuseful in the sense that maybe you can't get away from your childhood, but useful in the sense that at least your memory's going to be slightly more accurate because you're getting repetition, you're getting spaced repetition on it.
从某种意义上说，它是无用的，因为你可能无法摆脱童年，但从某种意义上说，它是有用的，至少你的记忆会稍微更准确，因为你会重复，你会间隔重复。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
A previous guest hypothesized, I don't think this was based on real data, hypothesized that, like if you go to a concert now, everyone's taking photos of the concert-
之前有一位嘉宾假设，我不认为这是基于真实的数据，假设，就像你现在去听一场音乐会，每个人都在拍音乐会的照片——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
as opposed to just experiencing the concert.
而不仅仅是体验音乐会。
They hypothesized that perhaps people have more memory of the photo-taking experience and the photo than the actual experience, which is a kind of an interesting divergence of the-
他们假设，也许人们对拍照经历和照片的记忆比实际经历更多，这是一种有趣的分歧——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
perceptual window that you're taking in information through.
您获取信息的感知窗口。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right.
对。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
I'm not telling people not to take photos or videos, but it is sort of interesting that you're at a concert that thousands of people are at, and everyone's taping it and projecting them-- Maybe it's because people want to project themselves into the concert for their friends and followers to see.
我并不是告诉人们不要拍照或录像，但有趣的是，你在一场有数千人参加的音乐会上，每个人都在录制并投影它们——也许是因为人们想将自己投影到音乐会中，让他们的朋友和追随者看到。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I suspect it's a social issue, yeah.
我怀疑这是一个社会问题，是的。
Everyone wants to prove that they were there.
每个人都想证明他们在那里。
I went and saw the Mona Lisa at the Louvre recently, and every person there was just taking a picture of it instead of standing there looking at the damn Mona Lisa.
我最近去卢浮宫看了《蒙娜丽莎》，那里的每个人都只是给它拍照，而不是站在那里看那该死的蒙娜丽莎。
But here's my suspicion, is that they might have a slightly less present experience at the moment, but maybe it also lasts longer in the sense that every once in a while, they see that picture of themselves at the concert, and they remember it.
但我的怀疑是，他们目前的体验可能稍微少一些，但也许这种体验会持续更长的时间，因为每隔一段时间，他们就会看到自己在音乐会上的照片，并记住它。
So maybe the area under the curve is the same.
所以也许曲线下的面积是相同的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
We live in a polarized world right now.
我们现在生活在一个两极分化的世界。
I think it was always polarized, but it seems increasingly so.
我认为它总是两极分化，但似乎越来越如此。
Is it more polarized?
是否更加两极分化？
And you've done some interesting work on the neuroscience around polarization, and I think it's just important for us to be aware of the fact that we're all prone to this.
您围绕极化在神经科学方面做了一些有趣的工作，我认为重要的是我们要意识到我们都容易出现这种情况。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And perhaps also, I would hope, to also push back on it.
也许我也希望能够抵制它。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
But I also feel like people like to be in the echo chamber, that there might be some dopamine reward or other neuromodulator reward for verifying what we think to be true.
但我也觉得人们喜欢呆在回音室里，可能会有一些多巴胺奖励或其他神经调节剂奖励来验证我们认为是真的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I also think this is a social thing.
我也认为这是一个社会问题。
I think you can't even talk about beliefs that we hold without talking about what that means for identity and for what team we're on.
我认为你甚至不能谈论我们所持有的信念，而不谈论这对身份和我们所在的团队意味着什么。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Okay, so let me back up.
好吧，让我备份一下。
I think we're not any more polarized than ever before.
我认为我们并没有比以往更加两极分化。
Just as an example, look at the 20th century.
举个例子，看看20世纪。
If you look really what happened with Nazism in Europe, or in Germany, or fascism in Italy, or what happened in Cambodia with Pol Pot, or in Rwanda, or the Chinese and Russian communist revolutions.
如果你真正看看欧洲纳粹主义、德国法西斯主义、意大利法西斯主义、柬埔寨波尔布特、卢旺达、中国和俄罗斯共产主义革命所发生的事情。
All these things were extraordinarily polarized moments where people took up arms and killed their neighbors.
所有这些事情都是极其两极分化的时刻，人们拿起武器杀害了他们的邻居。
And that was all pre-social media.
那都是前社交媒体。
So I don't think that has much to do with it, except that I do think maybe we're more aware because it used to be that everyone was in their echo chambers.
所以我认为这与此没有太大关系，只是我确实认为也许我们更加了解，因为过去每个人都在自己的回声室中。
Also, nothing new there, but all of your friends and neighbors and whatever all believed in whatever.
而且，那里没有什么新鲜事，但是你所有的朋友和邻居以及任何人都相信任何东西。
And so you didn't realize there were other people who believed other things.
所以你没有意识到还有其他人相信其他事情。
But I think now we're just much more exposed to that.
但我认为现在我们更容易受到这种影响。
Okay, so polarization, nothing really new about that, but it's very important for us to understand this.
好吧，两极分化，这并不是什么新鲜事，但理解这一点对我们来说非常重要。
So one of the experiments we did in my lab was the following.
我们在实验室所做的实验之一如下。
We put people in the brain scanner, fMRI.
我们让人们接受脑部扫描仪，功能磁共振成像。
They see six hands on the screen.
他们在屏幕上看到六只手。
All the hands look pretty much alike.
所有的手看起来都非常相似。
And the computer goes around, do, do, do, do, do, and it picks one of the hands, and then you see that hand get stabbed with a syringe needle.
计算机四处走动，做，做，做，做，做，它选择了其中一只手，然后你看到那只手被注射器针头刺伤了。
What happens is you have this empathic response, specifically this network of areas that we summarize as the pain matrix, comes online.
发生的事情是你有这种共情反应，特别是我们总结为疼痛矩阵的这个区域网络，上线了。
It's not your hand getting stabbed, nonetheless, you're watching a hand getting stabbed, and this is the neural basis of empathy.
不是你的手被刺伤，尽管如此，你正在看着一只手被刺伤，这就是同理心的神经基础。
You're feeling, ah, what would it feel like if that were my hand?
你会觉得，啊，如果那是我的手，会是什么感觉？
Great.
伟大的。
Okay.
好的。
Now what we do is we put a one-word label on each hand, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Scientologist, Hindu, Atheist.
现在我们要做的就是在每只手上贴上一个词的标签：基督徒、犹太教徒、穆斯林、山达基教徒、印度教徒、无神论者。
Computer goes around, do, do, do, picks a hand, you see that hand get stabbed, and the question is, does your brain care as much if it's a member of one of your out-groups versus your in-group?
计算机四处走动，做，做，做，选择一只手，你看到那只手被刺伤，问题是，如果它是你的外群体成员还是你的内群体成员，你的大脑是否同样关心它？
Turns out the answer, depressingly, is that your brain cares much less.
令人沮丧的是，答案是你的大脑对此的关心程度要低得多。
So the size of the empathic response, if it's your in-group, is enhanced from what it was, and if it's any one of your out-groups, it's diminished.
因此，如果是你的内群体，移情反应的规模会比原来有所增强，而如果是你的任何一个外群体，移情反应的规模就会减弱。
By the way, this is not a criticism of religion because we find exactly the same thing with atheists.
顺便说一句，这并不是对宗教的批评，因为我们发现无神论者也有同样的情况。
People who profess themselves as atheists really care when they see the atheist hand get stabbed.
自称无神论者的人在看到无神论者的手被刺伤时真的很关心。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Really?
真的吗？
They're-
他们是——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
It's everything about in-groups and out-groups.
这是关于群体内和群体外的一切。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Okay.
好的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So it turns out this is such a low-level response.
事实证明这是一个非常低级的回应。
Now, happily, this doesn't necessarily map onto how you act as a person.
现在，令人高兴的是，这并不一定映射到你作为一个人的行为方式。
This is just your first response.
这只是您的第一反应。
You care more about your in-groups.
你更关心你的内部群体。
Other labs, like Tania Singer And others have shown very similar versions of this with even things like sports teams.
其他实验室，如塔尼亚·辛格（Tania Singer）和其他实验室，甚至在运动队等方面也展示了非常相似的版本。
In fact, one of the experiments we did was we brought fresh people in, and we said, "Hey, I want you to toss a coin.
事实上，我们所做的一个实验是我们引入了新人，然后我们说：“嘿，我想让你抛一枚硬币。
If it's heads, you're a Justinian.
如果是正面，那么你就是查士丁尼。
If it's tails, you're an Augustinian." So they toss the coin, they find out what they are.
如果是反面，你就是奥古斯丁教徒。”所以他们扔硬币，他们发现它们是什么。
We give them a wristband that reminds them that they're a Justinian or Augustinian.
我们给他们一个腕带，提醒他们他们是查士丁尼或奥古斯丁教徒。
Then they go in the scanner, and they see Justinian or Augustinian hands getting stabbed.
然后他们进入扫描仪，看到查士丁尼或奥古斯丁的手被刺伤。
And it turns out they have a bigger response predicated on their team.
事实证明，他们对自己的团队有更大的反应。
Completely arbitrary label, it doesn't mean anything.
完全随意的标签，没有任何意义。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
But this is how we are wired very strongly for in-groups and out-groups.
但这就是我们对内群体和外群体的强烈联系。
Obviously, this is a real problem for everything we're witnessing around us.
显然，对于我们周围所目睹的一切来说，这都是一个真正的问题。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Can I ask you-
我可以问你吗-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Please
请
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
a question?
一个问题？
I have a theory, unsubstantiated by any laboratory data, that we all naturally feel some degree of empathy for both in-group or common group and other group, except for groups that we really despise.
我有一个未经任何实验室数据证实的理论，即我们都会自然地对内部群体或共同群体以及其他群体产生某种程度的同情，除了我们真正鄙视的群体。
Okay?
好的？
I think there are some people who, provided that the other person isn't being tortured or killed, they're sort of like, "Oh, well," dislike them anyway.
我认为有些人，只要对方没有受到酷刑或杀害，他们就会有点像，“哦，好吧，”无论如何都不喜欢他们。
But I think we tend to feel, we know how we feel about someone or a group when something good happens for them.
但我认为，当某人或一个群体发生好事时，我们往往会感觉到，我们知道我们对他们的感受如何。
To me, it's a much stronger indicator.
对我来说，这是一个更强有力的指标。
So has the reverse experiment ever been done, where instead of the hand getting stabbed with a syringe-
所以曾经做过相反的实验，不是用注射器刺伤手-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm
毫米
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
the person of same group or outside group is being given something that is of value?
同一群体或外部群体的人是否获得了有价值的东西？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
That's interesting.
这很有趣。
I don't know.
我不知道。
I don't think anyone's run that experiment, to my knowledge.
据我所知，我认为没有人做过这个实验。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Because if I tell you, if I were to have access to your thoughts, and I could find 100 people that you know, in your mind, and arrange them on the continuum of really, really adore this person, all the way to, I'm not going to use the word hate, but really, really dislike this person.
因为如果我告诉你，如果我能够了解你的想法，我就能在你的脑海中找到 100 个你认识的人，并将他们排列在非常非常喜欢这个人的连续体上，一直到，我不会使用“讨厌”这个词，而是非常非常不喜欢这个人。
And I tell you and give any one of them stage three pancreatic cancer-
我告诉你，将其中任何一个列为胰腺癌第三期——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm
毫米
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
I imagine, as an empathic person, you're going to be like, "Ah, that sucks." But if I instead flip it and say, "Okay, this person you really like, they had something spectacular happen to them," versus somebody that you dislike, something spectacular.
我想，作为一个有同理心的人，你会说，“啊，那太糟糕了。”但如果我反过来说，“好吧，你真正喜欢的这个人，他们身上发生了一些壮观的事情”，而不是你不喜欢的人，发生了一些壮观的事情。
There's a little bit of a twist on the feeling of happiness for somebody that you don't like receiving something that maybe you think they didn't deserve.
对于一个你不喜欢收到你认为他们不值得的东西的人来说，幸福感会有点扭曲。
And I think we are all wired this way to some extent.
我认为我们在某种程度上都是这样的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
That's a really interesting point.
这是一个非常有趣的观点。
To my knowledge, no one has done that experiment.
据我所知，没有人做过这个实验。
And in a sense, it's because this issue of when something bad happens to someone, we naturally have an empathic response if it's a stranger.
从某种意义上说，这是因为当某人发生不好的事情时，如果是陌生人，我们自然会产生同理心反应。
Look at the issue of, I don't know, let's say some older gentleman gets his nose broken because someone attacks him outdoors at a park.
看看这个问题，我不知道，假设一位年长的绅士因为有人在公园外袭击他而被打断了鼻子。
You would feel empathy for that.
你会对此感到同情。
But now if I tell you, "Oh, look, he was at a Democrat rally or a Republican rally," depending on your perspective on the world, you might have differential empathy predicated on how strongly you feel on one team or the other.
但现在，如果我告诉你，“哦，看，他参加了民主党集会或共和党集会”，根据你对世界的看法，你可能会根据你对一个团队或另一个团队的感受有多强烈而产生不同的同理心。
Here's the thing.
事情是这样的。
Even with pancreatic cancer, there's a whole lot of experiments from my lab and other labs that shows that sometimes when something happens to someone that we don't like, the reward system actually comes on.
即使是胰腺癌，我的实验室和其他实验室的大量实验表明，有时当我们不喜欢的人发生某些事情时，奖励系统实际上就会启动。
Tania Singh had a "Nature" paper on this, showing that you actually show reward system activation when something happens, which is awful.
塔尼亚·辛格（Tania Singh）就此发表了一篇《自然》论文，表明当事情发生时，你实际上会激活奖励系统，这很糟糕。
But one thing I have always noticed in the movies is that you're watching the James Bond movie or whatever, and the bad guy falls from a 500-foot building and splats on the ground, and you eat your popcorn.
但我在电影中一直注意到的一件事是，你在看詹姆斯·邦德电影或其他什么电影，坏人从 500 英尺高的建筑物上掉下来，摔在地上，然后你吃爆米花。
You don't care at all that something awful happened to somebody.
你根本不在乎某人发生了可怕的事情。
Whereas if James Bond gets grazed by a bullet, you feel like, "Oh, ow, poor guy." It's weird how much we can dial this around-
然而，如果詹姆斯·邦德被子弹擦伤，你会觉得，“哦，哦，可怜的家伙。”奇怪的是我们能绕多少圈-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm
毫米
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
where we simply don't care when bad things happen to other people.
当坏事发生在其他人身上时，我们根本不在乎。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And what you're describing provides a very useful filter for what we see out there in the media, and just recently, there was this event that's being debated very intensely from both sides.
你所描述的内容为我们在媒体上看到的内容提供了一个非常有用的过滤器，就在最近，双方对这一事件进行了非常激烈的辩论。
Someone was shot.
有人被枪杀了。
Whose fault was it?
是谁的错？
Were they within their rights to shoot her, et cetera?
他们有权开枪射杀她等等吗？
It's immediate polarization around-
这是立即两极分化 -
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
same collection of videos, two totally different interpretations from-
同样的视频集，两种完全不同的解释——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Right, because was that woman your protagonist or your antagonist?
对了，因为那个女人是你的主角还是你的对手？
And just like in the movies, we have a completely different empathic response based on that.
就像电影中一样，我们基于此产生了完全不同的移情反应。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
In the hypothetical example of an experiment where people that are either same group or different group are rewarded, I feel like it gets to an issue that's a little bit more subtle than when people are harmed, because it gets to this notion of zero-sum.
在假设的实验示例中，同一群体或不同群体的人都获得奖励，我觉得这涉及到一个比人们受到伤害时更微妙的问题，因为它涉及到零和概念。
If somebody else gets something, does that mean anything was taken from you?
如果别人得到了一些东西，是否意味着你的东西被拿走了？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Not necessarily, right?
不一定吧？
But there are some people who go through life seeing people get things, and they feel the pain of what they didn't get by virtue of someone else getting something.
但有些人一生中看到别人得到一些东西，他们会因为别人得到一些东西而感到痛苦。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And it's got to be a very difficult place to live.
这一定是一个非常难以居住的地方。
And yet, I've known people like that.
然而，我也认识这样的人。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
There are people who hate rich people.
有些人讨厌有钱人。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And they hate them for a number of reasons.
他们出于多种原因讨厌他们。
Maybe they were treated poorly, et cetera.
也许他们受到了不好的对待，等等。
They hate famous people.
他们讨厌名人。
They hate beautiful people.
他们讨厌漂亮的人。
You can see this.
你可以看到这个。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Right?
对吗？
And what aspect of self, other, in-group, out-group does that relate to?
这与自我、他人、内群体、外群体的哪些方面相关？
Because it gets us to this notion of how much resource there is to go around.
因为它让我们知道有多少资源可供使用。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Something for someone else is something taken from us is a very different perspective.
给别人的东西和从我们身上夺走的东西是一个非常不同的视角。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
That's right.
这是正确的。
I don't know the answer to that except that people clearly are wired differently on that in terms of whether they think it's a zero-sum game or there's infinite resources.
我不知道这个问题的答案，只是人们显然对此有不同的看法，他们认为这是一场零和游戏还是有无限的资源。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Do we see it in animals?
我们在动物身上看到它吗？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes, actually.
是的，实际上。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
There are experiments on capuchin monkeys where the monkey does something and then gets a piece of banana, and then the other monkey does something in the neighboring cage and gets a piece of banana.
有一些针对卷尾猴的实验，其中一只猴子做了一些事情，然后得到了一块香蕉，然后另一只猴子在邻近的笼子里做了一些事情，然后得到了一块香蕉。
And so they're doing this, but then the other monkey doing it gets a grape, which is a big treat for the monkey, and the first monkey goes nuts, and he's shaking the bars.
他们就这样做了，但是另一只猴子这样做了，得到了一颗葡萄，这对猴子来说是一个很大的享受，第一只猴子发疯了，他摇动了酒吧。
He's so angry that the other monkey got a better reward.
他很生气，因为另一只猴子得到了更好的奖励。
There's this sense of fairness that's actually quite deep in our evolution about what's unfair and so on.
这种公平感实际上深深地存在于我们对不公平等事物的进化过程中。
But I want to come back to this issue about rewarding people versus punishing.
但我想回到这个关于奖励与惩罚的问题。
To my mind, the reason I care so much about this issue of harm happening to people and when we don't care-
在我看来，我之所以如此关心这个发生在人们身上的伤害问题以及当我们不关心时——
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm
嗯嗯
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
...
...
is because of when we look at what happens around the world, I'm not even talking right now.
是因为当我们看看世界各地发生的事情时，我现在甚至都没有说话。
Let's just take the 20th century.
我们就以20世纪为例。
We constantly see people murdering their neighbors for all kinds of reasons.
我们经常看到人们出于各种原因谋杀邻居。
For religious reasons, for atheist, communist, secular reasons.
出于宗教原因，出于无神论者、共产主义、世俗原因。
For all kinds of reasons, people are perfectly willing to take their friends and neighbors.
由于各种原因，人们非常愿意带上他们的朋友和邻居。
Look at the Hutu and Tutsi in Rwanda.
看看卢旺达的胡图族和图西族。
They had lived together, were friends, there was intermarriage, and then the Hutu raised up their machetes and slaughtered Tutsi at a rate faster than the Germans were able to do with gas chambers and Jews.
他们住在一起，成为朋友，通婚，然后胡图人举起砍刀屠杀图西人，其速度比德国人对毒气室和犹太人的屠杀速度还要快。
How these things happen, it's so important for us to understand what are the elements that lead to in-group and out-group stuff.
这些事情是如何发生的，对我们来说了解导致群体内和群体外的事情的因素非常重要。
One of the things I've been very interested in is propaganda, and it turns out across place and time, all governments do propaganda in exactly the same way, which is you simply dehumanize the other group by calling them an animal or a virus, a pestilence, rats.
我一直非常感兴趣的一件事是宣传，事实证明，无论在什么地方和时间，所有政府都以完全相同的方式进行宣传，就是通过称其他群体为动物或病毒、瘟疫、老鼠来使他们失去人性。
Nowadays, you can even call them robots, whatever.
如今，你甚至可以称它们为机器人，无论如何。
Anything that's not human, that turns off these networks that we have in the prefrontal lobe that care about other humans and how to interact with other humans.
任何非人类的东西都会关闭我们在前额叶中关心其他人类以及如何与其他人类互动的网络。
Our colleague Lasana Harris has studied this stuff.
我们的同事拉萨娜·哈里斯（Lasana Harris）研究了这个东西。
And what happens is when you're dealing with an object now, the famous thing that happened in Rwanda is the Tutsi were described as cockroaches, and the radio was blaring that all the time, "The Tutsi are cockroaches." So killing a cockroach isn't so hard to do.
现在当你处理一个物体时，发生在卢旺达的著名事件是图西族被描述为蟑螂，广播里一直在大声喊着，“图西族是蟑螂。”所以杀死蟑螂并不是一件难事。
So you grab your machete, and you go do that.
所以你拿起你的砍刀，然后就去做。
And I am essentially dedicating my life to this kind of thing as an education about this, such that when the next generation hears propaganda about any group, they say, "Wait a minute, I've heard that trick before.
我基本上将我的一生奉献给了这种事情，作为有关这方面的教育，这样当下一代听到有关任何团体的宣传时，他们会说，“等一下，我以前听过这个把戏。
I know what this is.
我知道这是什么。
This is just calling the other group, 'Oh, they're not like us.
这只是在称呼另一组人，‘哦，他们不像我们。
They're not human,' and so on." Dialing down these networks that care about other humans.
他们不是人类，’等等。”关闭这些关心其他人类的网络。
Therefore, I don't care about them as much, I don't have empathy for them as much, and I'm willing to take up arms against them.
因此，我对他们没有那么关心，对他们没有那么同理心，我愿意拿起武器反对他们。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Many years ago, I was at a meeting, and one of our colleagues, I'll let them remain anonymous for soon to be obvious reasons, stood up and made a really strong case for not referring to the mice, and at that time, experiments were still done on cats and non-human primates.
许多年前，我在一次会议上，我们的一位同事，我会让他们保持匿名，原因很快就会显而易见，他站起来，提出了一个非常有力的理由，不提及老鼠，当时，仍在对猫和非人类灵长类动物进行实验。
Those are still used, but to a lesser extent now.
这些仍在使用，但现在程度较小。
But still, to not refer to them as animal models, because he felt that it was, not dehumanizing them, it was removing the sense that they were real beings.
但仍然不要将它们称为动物模型，因为他觉得这并不是使它们失去人性，而是消除了它们是真实存在的感觉。
And as someone who has worked on a number of species, including humans, and frankly, I'll say this proudly, I'm relieved to not do experiments on animals anymore.
作为一个对包括人类在内的许多物种进行过研究的人，坦率地说，我会自豪地说，我很庆幸不再在动物身上进行实验。
I really did not like that aspect.
我真的不喜欢这个方面。
I did like working with humans, we say, not on humans, because they can sign up and consent, and that sort of thing.
我们说，我确实喜欢与人类合作，而不是与人类合作，因为他们可以签名并同意，诸如此类。
I think every profession has this.
我想每个职业都有这个。
My friends who are psychologists, you said your dad was a psychiatrist.
我的心理学家朋友们，你们说你们的父亲是一名精神科医生。
I always ask people, psychologists and psychiatrists, "Do you refer to the people that you treat as clients or as patients?" The language doesn't always matter so much, but I think when it comes to animal experimentation, when it comes to people and professional relationships, it actually does matter.
我总是问人们，心理学家和精神科医生，“你把你对待的人称为客户还是病人？”语言并不总是那么重要，但我认为当涉及到动物实验、涉及到人和专业关系时，它实际上确实很重要。
Because I think, as you pointed out, certain circuits in the brain get turned off or on, depending on how we refer to people.
因为我认为，正如您所指出的，大脑中的某些回路会关闭或打开，具体取决于我们如何称呼人。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah, exactly.
是的，完全正确。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
I know I'm starting to sound a little bit like this is some political statement, but it's not.
我知道我听起来有点像这是某种政治声明，但事实并非如此。
It's just, I think that words matter.
只是，我认为言语很重要。
They really do.
他们确实这么做了。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Oh, I totally agree.
哦，我完全同意。
I think this political statement does matter because when the society reaches a point where some group of people is referred to essentially as non-human, that's when things get really dangerous really fast.
我认为这种政治声明确实很重要，因为当社会达到某些群体基本上被称为非人类的地步时，事情就会很快变得非常危险。
The Tutsi as cockroaches, the Jews as pestilence in Germany, and whatever.
图西人是蟑螂，犹太人是德国的瘟疫，等等。
All these things make a difference.
所有这些事情都会产生影响。
And by the way, in Germany, in the Reichstag in 1934, all the people elected to the Reichstag were either far-right Nazi Party or far-left Communist Party.
顺便说一句，在德国，1934年的国会大厦里，所有当选国会议员的人要么是极右纳粹党，要么是极左共产党。
It was a really polarized time.
那真是一个两极分化的时期。
And the part that's so scary about polarization of that extreme is that it just takes a moment for one party to eat the other.
这种极端两极分化的可怕之处在于，一方只需要一会儿就可以吃掉另一方。
It goes really fast.
进展得真快。
And suddenly, when Hitler took power, when the President von Hindenburg died, Hitler just declared himself the Führer and rounded up all the communists and put them in jail, in concentration camps right away.
突然间，当希特勒掌权时，当冯兴登堡总统去世时，希特勒刚刚宣布自己为元首，并立即围捕了所有共产党人，并将他们关进监狱，关进集中营。
And so that's why polarization, if there are things we can do as a society to work on that, to try to get better models of the other person, to have meaningful debates and listen to the other side, it doesn't mean coming to agree with them or whatever, but it means saying, "Okay.
这就是为什么两极分化，如果我们作为一个社会可以做一些事情来解决这个问题，尝试为他人找到更好的模型，进行有意义的辩论并倾听对方的意见，这并不意味着同意他们或其他什么，而是意味着说，“好吧。
I'm going to assume the other person is speaking genuinely.
我会假设对方说的是真心话。
What is their reason for holding this political position?" Also, by the way, having a better notion of our own internal models, which is that we are extraordinarily limited.
他们持有这一政治立场的原因是什么？”另外，顺便说一句，对我们自己的内部模型有一个更好的概念，那就是我们非常有限。
This is actually what my next, next book is about.
这实际上就是我的下一本书的内容。
It's called "Empire of the Invisible," and it's about why we all believe our own internal models.
它被称为“看不见的帝国”，它解释了为什么我们都相信我们自己的内部模型。
We've all taken very thin trajectories through space and time, and we've collected up our little scraps of data, and we think, "Oh, I know the truth.
我们都在空间和时间上走过了非常细小的轨迹，我们收集了一些小数据，然后我们想，“哦，我知道真相。
I know how to think about the world and these political issues, and if I could just shout in all capital letters on X loudly enough, everyone would come to agree with me." Essentially, everyone thinks this deep down, irrespective of what their political position is.
我知道如何思考这个世界和这些政治问题，如果我能在 X 上用大写字母大声喊叫，每个人都会同意我的观点。”本质上，每个人内心深处都有这样的想法，无论他们的政治立场是什么。
And that's weird that we can't see the fence lines of our own internal models.
奇怪的是我们看不到我们自己的内部模型的界限。
So I think it's really important that this gets built all the way down into our education system at the high school level, maybe even junior high, where we understand the limitations of our own model, we understand how to try to understand other people's models, we understand when it's appropriate to blind our biases, in the way that, for example, symphony orchestras have been doing this for decades now, where they do a blind audition of a musician behind a curtain.
所以我认为，将这一点一直融入我们高中甚至初中的教育体系中非常重要，在那里我们了解自己模型的局限性，我们了解如何尝试理解其他人的模型，我们了解何时适合蒙蔽我们的偏见，例如，交响乐团几十年来一直在这样做，他们在幕后对音乐家进行盲目试听。
So you can't have the opportunity for discrimination based on gender or race or anything else.
所以你不能有机会受到基于性别、种族或其他任何因素的歧视。
You're just hearing, "Oh, that was a great oboe player." And so things like that.
你只会听到，“哦，那是一位伟大的双簧管演奏家。”诸如此类的事情。
And I also think that there's another technique that might be super useful here, and this is I've been exploring this a lot lately, what I'm calling the complexification of relationships, meaning if you have something in common with someone, and then you find out later that that person has a very different opinion than you do on some hot button political issue, you're more willing to listen to them because you're already pals.
我还认为还有另一种技术在这里可能非常有用，这就是我最近一直在探索的，我称之为关系的复杂化，这意味着如果你与某人有一些共同点，然后你后来发现那个人在某些热门政治问题上的观点与你截然不同，你会更愿意听他们的意见，因为你们已经是朋友了。
You go surfing together, whatever, you like the same sports team or whatever.
你们一起去冲浪，不管怎样，你们喜欢同一个运动队或者其他什么。
You're more willing to listen.
你更愿意倾听。
My example for this is the Iroquois Native Americans who were up in sort of northern Wisconsin area.
我的例子是居住在威斯康星州北部地区的易洛魁美洲原住民。
Five tribes, they all killed each other for years and years.
五个部落，他们多年来都互相残杀。
They had a new leader come in, this guy, Deganawida, who came to be known as the Great Peacemaker.
他们迎来了一位新领导人，这个人名叫德加纳维达（Deganawida），后来被称为“伟大的和平缔造者”。
What he did is he said, "Look, you've got these five tribes.
他所做的是他说：“看，你有这五个部落。
I'm going to assign each person membership in a clan." So let's say we're in the same tribe, but you're a member of the Beaver Clan, I'm a member of the Eagle Clan, and so on, and these clan memberships are cross-cutting such that now you say, "Hey, let's go invade that tribe over the hill." And I say, "Oh, I don't know.
我将给每个人分配一个部落的成员资格。”假设我们在同一个部落，但你是海狸氏族的成员，我是鹰氏族的成员，等等，这些氏族成员身份是交叉的，所以现在你说，“嘿，让我们去入侵山那边的那个部落。”我说：“哦，我不知道。
That guy's a member of the Eagle Clan, and so am I." I've got these cross-cutting relationships now, and I'm less likely, I'm less willing to do that.
那家伙是鹰族的人，我也是。”我现在已经有了这些跨领域的关系，而且我不太可能、也不太愿意这样做。
And this ties back to the experiments we did that I mentioned with the hand stabbing.
这与我提到的手刺实验有关。
What we now do is we say, "The year is 2029, and these three religions have teamed up against these three religions." And now you see the different hands get stabbed.
我们现在要做的就是说，“今年是2029年，这三个宗教联合起来对抗这三个宗教。”现在你看到不同的手被刺伤。
But the ones who I just told you in one sentence are your allies now, you care more about them, just because I arbitrarily told you that they're your allies.
但我刚才一句话告诉你的那些人现在都是你的盟友了，你更关心他们，只是因为我随意告诉你他们是你的盟友。
And so when things get complexified like this, we suddenly care more about certain groups, and so on.
因此，当事情变得像这样复杂时，我们突然更加关心某些群体，等等。
Anyway, I think this is a really important thing to do.
无论如何，我认为这是一件非常重要的事情。
So I've patented a new social media algorithm, which essentially works simply by surfacing what people have in common.
因此，我为一种新的社交媒体算法申请了专利，该算法本质上只是通过呈现人们的共同点来发挥作用。
So if you and I are both on this algorithm, it, "Oh, we've got this in common, that in common." And all those things get surfaced, and we come to know each other and like each other.
因此，如果你和我都使用这个算法，那么，“哦，我们有这个共同点，那个共同点。”所有这些事情都浮出水面，我们开始互相了解并互相喜欢。
And only later, temporally down the line, do we hear, "Oh, wow, I didn't realize you felt so differently about gun control or abortion or whatever."
直到后来，暂时，我们才听到，“哦，哇，我没有意识到你对枪支管制或堕胎或其他什么感觉如此不同。”
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Yeah.
是的。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
We learn that later, and then we're more willing to lean in and talk.
我们后来才知道这一点，然后我们就更愿意倾心倾诉。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Fascinating.
令人着迷。
I thought for a while that the solution to polarization was going to be, it sounds like a laboratory experiment, but the interbreeding across-
我想了一段时间，解决两极分化的办法是，这听起来像是一个实验室实验，但是杂交——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm
毫米
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
first genetic, but also, and geographic, but also racial and cultural and ethnic boundaries, right?
首先是遗传，也和地理、种族、文化和民族界限有关，对吗？
And when you have people mixing and having children that are mixed, you can no longer assign identity in a way that allows people to continue to hurt and harm one another.
当人们混合在一起并生下混合的孩子时，你就不能再以一种允许人们继续互相伤害和伤害的方式来分配身份。
Because I do think that the one thing that runs very deep in our species is this evolutionary drive, and there are other sources of this, of course, but to make more of ourselves and to protect our young.
因为我确实认为，在我们物种中根深蒂固的一件事就是这种进化动力，当然，这种动力还有其他来源，但为了让我们自己更加强大并保护我们的后代。
And if those young are of several different races or religions, et cetera, then you really don't have anywhere to go-
如果那些年轻人属于几个不同的种族或宗教等等，那么你真的无处可去-
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Oh.
哦。
You know, I-
你知道，我-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
in terms of violence.
在暴力方面。
And of course, I started thinking about this in the way that when I grew up, it wasn't that long ago.
当然，我长大后就开始思考这个问题，那是在不久之前。
I was born in '75.
我出生于 75 年。
But it was 50 years ago that you saw less marriage across races.
但50年前，跨种族通婚的现象还很少见。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Mm.
嗯。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
You just did, right?
你刚刚这么做了，对吗？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
It happened, but far less frequently than it does now, across religions, even across cultures.
这种情况发生过，但频率远低于现在，跨宗教，甚至跨文化。
And now things are quite different, but the polarization continues.
现在情况已大不相同，但两极分化仍在继续。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
I wish I shared that optimism on that front.
我希望我在这方面也能分享这种乐观态度。
But the fact is, in Rwanda, Hutu and Tutsi had been intermarrying for a long time.
但事实是，在卢旺达，胡图族和图西族早已通婚。
In Germany, Jews and Christians had been intermarrying there for a long time.
在德国，犹太人和基督徒长期以来一直在那里通婚。
But when stuff hits the fan, none of that matters, and people will still make dividing lines and say, "Hey, if you've got some of this in you, you're on the other side."
但当事情发生时，这些都不重要了，人们仍然会划出界限并说：“嘿，如果你身上有一些这样的东西，那么你就站在了另一边。”
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Mm-hmm.
嗯嗯。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
I wish I had a more optimistic note there, but-
我希望我有一个更乐观的说法，但是-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
No, I think, well, it sounds like the projects you're involved in to try and reduce polarization are, well, I'll say certainly they're very important, and they sound very promising.
不，我认为，听起来你参与的旨在减少两极分化的项目是，嗯，我肯定会说它们非常重要，而且听起来非常有前途。
Look, I feel like we could go another six hours.
听着，我觉得我们还可以再走六个小时。
We have to have you back.
我们必须让你回来。
Of course, you have your own podcast.
当然，您有自己的播客。
Amazing podcast.
很棒的播客。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Great.
太棒了。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
So tell us about just for folks, we'll put links in the show note captions, but you're writing what?
那么，请告诉我们，仅供大家参考，我们将在节目注释标题中添加链接，但您在写什么？
Ten books now.
现在十本书。
You got a podcast.
你有一个播客。
You're involved in movie scripts.
你参与了电影剧本的创作。
But-
但是——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah
是啊
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
give us the highlights.
给我们重点介绍一下。
What are you up to these days when you're not teaching three different classes at Stanford?
当你不在斯坦福大学教授三个不同的课程时，你最近在忙什么？
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
So I'm running the podcast "Inner Cosmos," which is-
所以我正在运行播客“Inner Cosmos”，它是-
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Awesome podcast.
很棒的播客。
I listen to it.
我听听。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Thank you.
谢谢你。
Thanks.
谢谢。
And that's a really wonderful way for me to put out lots of ideas.
这对我来说是一个提出很多想法的好方法。
Often I do, mostly it's monologue, but I do have guests as well.
我经常这样做，大部分是独白，但我也有客人。
And I get to just tackle big philosophical questions about time, about polarization, about whatever.
我可以解决有关时间、极化或其他任何问题的重大哲学问题。
I just signed my next two books.
我刚刚签署了我的下两本书。
One is "The Ulysses Contract," and one I mentioned is called "Empire of the Invisible." And then, yeah, I'm also doing a lot in the realm of movie production stuff.
一本是《尤利西斯契约》，我提到的一本是《隐形帝国》。然后，是的，我也在电影制作领域做了很多事情。
We're making a documentary film right now with the comedian Craig Ferguson, where we're asking the question, can AI be funny?
我们现在正在与喜剧演员克雷格·弗格森一起制作一部纪录片，我们在其中提出一个问题：人工智能可以搞笑吗？
So we've built a robot that Craig is going to go on the road with and do this comedy with, like in the middle of the country.
所以我们建造了一个机器人，克雷格将带着它上路并拍摄这部喜剧，就像在美国中部一样。
And the reason we're starting there is because that allows us to ask all these deeper questions about AI, but in a way that draws people into the movie, because you can't just make a doomy, gloomy movie about AI and expect anybody to watch it.
我们从这里开始的原因是因为这让我们能够提出所有这些关于人工智能的更深层次的问题，但以一种吸引人们进入电影的方式，因为你不能只制作一部关于人工智能的厄运、阴沉的电影并期望任何人观看它。
But this is sort of a really fun, funny movie that allows us to really ask what's it going to mean for our lives.
但这是一部非常有趣的电影，它让我们真正地问它对我们的生活意味着什么。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Awesome.
太棒了。
And when you're not doing that, you're fixing doorknobs-
当你不这样做的时候，你就在修理门把手——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes
是的
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
and stuff in your home.
以及你家里的东西。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yes.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
And raising a family.
并养家糊口。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Yeah.
是的。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
David, thanks so much for coming here today.
大卫，非常感谢你今天来到这里。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Great to see you, Andrew.
很高兴见到你，安德鲁。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
As everyone now sees, and many already knew coming into this, you're a world-class educator and-
正如现在每个人都看到的，而且许多人已经知道要进入这个领域，你是一位世界级的教育家，而且——
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Thanks
谢谢
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
...
...
storyteller, and most importantly, a scientist who ran experiments.
讲故事的人，最重要的是，一位进行实验的科学家。
I think it really helps to have, no diss on science communicators that haven't run labs and things like that, but I think when one has done experiments, you get a real deep sense for how data comes together and what it does and doesn't mean, and you're a virtuoso.
我认为这确实有帮助，不要对没有运行过实验室之类的科学传播者提出异议，但我认为当一个人做过实验时，你会对数据如何组合在一起以及它意味着什么和不意味着什么有真正的深刻认识，你是一位艺术大师。
So thanks for Coming here today and sharing just so many pearls of wisdom and some practical takeaways that I know myself and other people are really going to work with.
因此，感谢您今天来到这里，分享了这么多的智慧珍珠和一些实用的要点，我知道我自己和其他人确实会使用它们。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
Great.
太棒了。
Thanks, Andrew.
谢谢，安德鲁。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Thanks.
谢谢。
Dr. David Eagleman:
大卫·伊格曼博士：
It's a blast being here.
来到这里真是太棒了。
Andrew Huberman:
安德鲁·休伯曼：
Awesome.
太棒了。
Come back.
回来。
Thank you for joining me for today's discussion with Dr. David Eagleman.
感谢您参加今天与 David Eagleman 博士的讨论。
To learn more about his work and to find links to his various books, please see the links in the show note captions.
要了解有关他的作品的更多信息并查找他的各种书籍的链接，请参阅节目注释标题中的链接。
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 follow the podcast by clicking the follow button on both Spotify and Apple.
此外，请通过单击 Spotify 和 Apple 上的关注按钮来关注播客。
And on both Spotify and Apple, you can leave us up to a five-star review, and you can now leave us comments at both Spotify and Apple.
在 Spotify 和 Apple 上，您可以给我们留下五星级的评论，现在您可以在 Spotify 和 Apple 上给我们留下评论。
Please also check out the sponsors mentioned at the beginning and throughout today's episode.
另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 for me or comments about the podcast or guests or topics that you'd like me to consider for the Huberman Lab podcast, please put those in the comments section on YouTube.
如果您对我有疑问，或者对播客或嘉宾有意见，或者您希望我为 Huberman Lab 播客考虑的主题，请将这些意见放入 YouTube 的评论部分。
I do read all the comments.
我确实阅读了所有评论。
For those of you that haven't heard, I have a new book coming out.
对于那些还没有听说过的人，我即将出版一本新书。
It's my very first book.
这是我的第一本书。
It's entitled "Protocols: An Operating Manual for the Human Body." This is a book that I've been working on for more than five years, and that's based on more than 30 years of research and experience, and it covers protocols for everything from sleep to exercise to stress control, protocols related to focus and motivation, and of course, I provide the scientific substantiation for the protocols that are included.
它的标题是“协议：人体操作手册”。这是我花了五年多时间编写的一本书，它基于 30 多年的研究和经验，涵盖了从睡眠到运动到压力控制的各个方面的方案，以及与注意力和动机相关的方案，当然，我还为所包含的方案提供了科学依据。
The book is now available by presale at protocolsbook.com.
该书现已在protocolbook.com 上预售。
There you can find links to various vendors.
在那里您可以找到各个供应商的链接。
You can pick the one that you like best.
您可以选择您最喜欢的一个。
Again, the book is called "Protocols: An Operating Manual for the Human Body." And if you're not already following me on social media, I am Huberman Lab on all social media platforms.
同样，这本书的名字是“协议：人体操作手册”。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, X, Threads, Facebook, and LinkedIn.
这就是 Instagram、X、Threads、Facebook 和 LinkedIn。
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 information 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上的信息不同。
Again, it's Huberman Lab on all social media platforms.
同样，所有社交媒体平台上都是 Huberman Lab。
And if you haven't already subscribed to our Neural Network Newsletter, the Neural Network Newsletter is a zero-cost monthly newsletter that includes podcast summaries as well as what we call protocols in the form of one to three-page PDFs that cover everything from how to optimize your sleep, how to optimize dopamine, deliberate cold exposure.
如果您还没有订阅我们的神经网络时事通讯，神经网络时事通讯是一份零成本的月度时事通讯，其中包括播客摘要以及我们所说的一到三页 PDF 形式的协议，涵盖从如何优化睡眠、如何优化多巴胺、故意冷暴露等所有内容。
We have a foundational fitness protocol that covers cardiovascular training and resistance training.
我们有一个基本的健身方案，涵盖心血管训练和阻力训练。
All of that is available completely zero cost.
所有这些都是完全零成本可用的。
You simply go to hubermanlab.com, go to the Menu tab in the top right corner, scroll down to Newsletter and enter your email.
您只需访问 hubermanlab.com，转到右上角的“菜单”选项卡，向下滚动到新闻通讯并输入您的电子邮件即可。
And I should emphasize that we do not share your email with anybody.
我要强调的是，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. David Eagleman.
再次感谢您参加今天与 David Eagleman 博士的讨论。
And last, but certainly not least, thank you for your interest in science.
最后但同样重要的是，感谢您对科学的兴趣。
Speaker 3:
演讲者3：
"I don't think I can be your friend," Isabella said.
“我想我不能成为你的朋友，”伊莎贝拉说。
Rebecca's stomach flipped.
丽贝卡的胃翻腾起来。
This is the love story of real Hinge couple Isabella and Rebecca, written and read by me, Tembi Denton-Hurst.
这是真实的铰链夫妇伊莎贝拉和丽贝卡的爱情故事，由我 Tembi Denton-Hurst 撰写和阅读。
Listen to the free audiobook now.
立即收听免费有声读物。