雙語(yǔ)閱讀：不要嘲笑“自信的傻子”

　　US late night talk show host Jimmy Kimmel features a recurring “Lie Witness News” section in his program. In the gag, pedestrians are asked a variety of questions with false premises.

　　美國(guó)深夜脫口秀(雞毛秀)的主持人吉米•科莫爾的節(jié)目中總是包含一個(gè)整人單元“Lie Witness News”。在這個(gè)搞笑單元中，路人會(huì)被問(wèn)及各種各樣莫須有的問(wèn)題。

　　In one episode, Kimmel’s crew asked people whether they thought the 2014 film Godzilla was insensitive to survivors of the 1954 giant lizard attack on Tokyo; in another, they asked whether former US president Bill Clinton gets enough credit for ending the Korean War.

　　比如某一期中，《吉米秀》的工作人員提出的問(wèn)題就是：你認(rèn)為2014年的電影《哥斯拉》是否沒(méi)有顧及1954年?yáng)|京巨蜥襲擊幸存者們的感情?另一期里，人們則被問(wèn)及：美國(guó)總統(tǒng)比爾•克林頓是不是終結(jié)了朝鮮戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的大功臣?

　　These are absurd questions, but surprisingly, many interviewees fall into Kimmel’s trap. Some appear willing to say just about anything on camera to hide their cluelessness about the subject at hand. Others seem eager to please, not wanting to let the interviewer down by giving the most boring response: I don’t know.

　　這些問(wèn)題聽(tīng)來(lái)荒.唐，但令人驚訝的是，很多受訪者竟然真得中招。很多人為了掩飾自己的無(wú)知，在攝像機(jī)前侃侃而談。另一些人不想用一句掃興的“我不知道”讓采訪者失望，于是極力取悅采訪者。。

　　But for some of these interviewees, says David Dunning, a professor of psychology at Cornell University, the trap may be an even deeper one. The most confident-sounding respondents often seem to think they do have some clue.

　　美國(guó)康奈爾大學(xué)的心理學(xué)教授大衛(wèi)•達(dá)寧表示，對(duì)某些受訪者而言，這些陷阱也許并不簡(jiǎn)單，因?yàn)槠渲心切┞?tīng)上去最自信的受訪者似乎堅(jiān)信自己知道一些答案。

　　Don’t laugh at these “confident idiots”, Dunning says writing in the Pacific Standard website, every one of us might behave just like one in similar situations.

　　達(dá)寧在Pacific Standard網(wǎng)站上的一篇文章中寫(xiě)道：不要嘲笑這些“自信的傻子”，因?yàn)榇蠹以陬愃频那榫持卸伎赡鼙憩F(xiàn)的和他們一樣。

　　With his colleagues at Cornell, Dunning carries out ongoing research in a lab that is constructed similarly to Kimmel’s gag.

　　在一個(gè)類似吉米•科莫爾搞笑節(jié)目的實(shí)驗(yàn)室里，達(dá)寧與康奈爾大學(xué)的其他同事一起正在做一個(gè)類似的實(shí)驗(yàn)。

　　They ask survey respondents if they are familiar with certain technical concepts from physics, biology, politics, and geography. A fair number claim familiarity with genuine terms like centripetal force and photon.

　　他們?cè)儐?wèn)受訪者是否熟悉物理、生物、政治以及地理領(lǐng)域的某些概念，結(jié)果顯示，相當(dāng)一部分認(rèn)為自己熟悉這些真實(shí)存在的概念，例如，向心力、光子。

　　But interestingly, they also claim they know about concepts that are entirely made up. In fact, Dunning says, the more knowledgeable respondents considered themselves on a general topic, the more familiarity they claimed with the meaningless terms associated with it.

　　但有趣的是，他們同樣還認(rèn)為自己也了解一些憑空編造出來(lái)的概念。而達(dá)寧說(shuō)，事實(shí)上，受訪者越是認(rèn)為自己了解某個(gè)領(lǐng)域，就越容易聲稱自己熟悉那些與之有關(guān)的、不存在的術(shù)語(yǔ)。

　　Foggy perception

　　朦朧的感覺(jué)

　　The result, according to Dunning, is not surprising. For more than 20 years, he has researched people’s understanding and evaluation of their knowledge, reasoning and learning. As it turns out, although what we know is often perceptible to us, even the broad outlines of what we don’t know are all too often completely invisible.

　　在達(dá)寧看來(lái)，這一結(jié)果并不奇怪。過(guò)去的二十多年間，達(dá)寧一直致力于研究人類對(duì)其知識(shí)、推理與學(xué)習(xí)的理解和評(píng)價(jià)。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，我們常常能對(duì)自己的所知有所認(rèn)識(shí)，但是對(duì)于我們所不知道的東西，我們卻一點(diǎn)都感覺(jué)不到。

　　To a great degree, Dunning says, we fail to recognize the frequency and scope of our ignorance.

　　達(dá)寧表示，很大程度上，我們并知道自己“無(wú)知”的范圍。

　　You’d think our ignorance would leave us confused or cautious. But instead, our ignorance is often accompanied with an inappropriate confidence, boosted by something that feels to us like knowledge.

　　你可能以為無(wú)知會(huì)讓我們變得迷?；蚴侵?jǐn)慎。但是事實(shí)卻恰恰相反，我們的無(wú)知常常與不合理的自信相伴而來(lái)，而我們自以為是知識(shí)的東西又進(jìn)一步加深了我們的無(wú)知。

　　Other studies also confirm that people who don’t know much about a given set of cognitive, technical, or social skills tend to greatly overestimate their ability and performance. Dunning gives an example: College students who hand in exams that will earn them Ds and Fs tend to think their efforts will be worthy of far higher grades.

　　另一些研究也證實(shí)：當(dāng)人們對(duì)某一認(rèn)知、科技或社會(huì)技能不甚了解時(shí)，更容易高估自己的能力和表現(xiàn)。達(dá)寧給出了一個(gè)例子：在大學(xué)考試中得了D或者F的同學(xué)更容易認(rèn)為，自己所付出的努力應(yīng)該換回更好的成績(jī)。

　　Occasionally, Dunning says, our ignorance and misplaced confidence can lead to disasters.

　　達(dá)寧說(shuō)，有時(shí)候，我們的無(wú)知加上不該有的自信會(huì)引起大災(zāi)難。