TED | 我们误解了“信任”

演讲精彩片段（节选）欣赏

In short, in our real lives, we seek to place trust in a differentiated way. We don’t make an assumption that the level of trust that we will have in every instance of a certain type of official or office-holder or type of person is going to be uniform.

简而言之，在我们现实生活中，我们以不同的方式来寻求信任。我们不对信任感的程度做假设。我们会对特定类型进行具体分析。那些公务员，官员之类的人，会被类型化。

I might, for example, say that I certainly trust a certain elementary school teacher I know to teach the reception class to read, but in no way to drive the school minibus. I might, after all, know that she wasn’t a good driver. I might trust my most loquacious friend to keep a conversation going but not - but perhaps not to keep a secret. Simple.

比如说，我会说我当然相信一个我知道的小学老师会教会学生怎么阅读，但是我不相信她可以开校车，也许最终我知道她确实不是个好司机。我也许相信我那爱喝酒的朋友是个聊天的好伙伴，但我不会相信他是个守得住秘密的人。就这么简单。

So if we’ve got those evidence in our ordinary lives of the way that trust is differentiated, why do we sort of drop all that intelligence when we think about trust more abstractly? I think the polls are very bad guides to the level of trust that actually exists, because they try to obliterate the good judgment that goes into placing trust.

在日常生活中我们有了这样的证据，说信任感是有区分的，那么为什么民意调查时我们一下子糊涂了，把信任感想得更概念化了呢？我觉得民意调查是个很差劲的衡量信任感是否存在的依据。因为它抹杀了人们良好的判断力，对考虑信任感的判断力。

Secondly, what about the aim? The aim is to have more trust. Well frankly, I think that’s a stupid aim. It’s not what I would aim at. I would aim to have more trust in the trustworthy but not in the untrustworthy.

第二，那个目的是怎么回事儿呢？目的是我们需要更多的信任感。坦白说，我觉得这个目的挺可笑的。这不是我想的那个目的。我会说，人们应该对值得信赖的（人）更加地信任。而不是去信任不值得信赖的人。

In fact, I aim positively to try not to trust the untrustworthy. And I think, of those people who, for example, placed their savings with the very aptly named Mr. Madoff, who then made off with them, and I think of them, and I think, well, yes, too much trust. More trust is not an intelligent aim in this life. Intelligently placed and intelligently refused trust is the proper aim.

实际上，我所说的目的是尽量不要信任不值得信赖的人。比如说，那些把自己的积蓄交给那个看起来很象样的，却把他们的钱都卷走的麦道夫先生的人，我觉得那些人呀，怎么说呢，对，太容易信任别人了。过度地信任别人不是一个很明智的目的。明智地信任和明智地选择不信任才是正确的目的。

Well once one says that, one says, yeah, okay, that means that what matters in the first place is not trust but trustworthiness. It’s judging how trustworthy people are in particular respects.

那么有人说，好呀，好，这不就是说最重要的不是要去信任，而是（对方的）信誉度吗？就是说要判断别人在某些方面是否值得信任。

And I think that judgment requires us to look at three things. Are they competent? Are they honest? Are they reliable? And if we find that a person is competent in the relevant matters, and reliable and honest, we’ll have a pretty good reason to trust them, because they’ll be trustworthy.

我觉得要想正确做出判断需要考虑三点。要看他们是否称职？是否诚实？是否可靠？如果我们觉得一个人是称职的，在他自己的领域是称职的，而且是诚实可靠的，我们就有理由去相信他们，因为他们是可信赖的。

But if, on the other hand, they’re unreliable, we might not. I have friends who are competent and honest, but I would not trust them to post a letter, because they’re forgetful. I have friends who are very confident they can do certain things, but I realize that they overestimate their own competence. And I’m very glad to say, I don’t think I have many friends who are competent and reliable but extremely dishonest. (Laughter) If so, I haven’t yet spotted it.

但是反过来，如果他们不可靠，那我们就不能信任他们。我有一些诚实可靠的朋友，但我就信不着他们去帮我寄信，因为他们很健忘。我有些非常自信的朋友，他们很能干，但是我觉得他们有些过于自信。当然我很高兴的是，我的朋友都是称职可靠，又不是非常不诚实的。（笑声） 也许有，我还没发现。

But that’s what we’re looking for: trustworthiness before trust. Trust is the response. Trustworthiness is what we have to judge. And, of course, it’s difficult. Across the last few decades, we’ve tried to construct systems of accountability for all sorts of institutions and professionals and officials and so on that will make it easier for us to judge their trustworthiness.

我们需要的就是：信任别人之前要看他的信誉度。信任是我们的反应，信誉度是需要我们来判断的。所以当然这不是容易做到的。过去的几十年里，我们努力地建立各种机构里的问责制度，是否达到专业水准或者官方要求等等。这些（问责制度）使我们更容易判断（这些机构）是否有信誉。