Love English 2 助大家快乐学英语！
点开上方链接有惊喜！
You’re sitting on the couch watching TV, when you hear a knock on the door. The police have just arrived to arrest your spouse— for murder. This accusation comes as a total shock. In your experience, your partner has always been gentle and loving, and you can't imagine them committing a grisly murder. 你正坐在沙发上看电视，这时你听到敲门声。是警察来了，以谋杀罪逮捕了你的配偶。这项指控简直令人震惊。毕竟你的伴侣一直都是温柔而有爱心的，你无法想象会犯他会下可怕的谋杀罪。But the evidence is serious: their fingerprints were found on the murder weapon. Your spouse insists they're innocent. “I know it looks bad,” they say, “but you have to believe me! If you don’t, who will?” Should you believe your spouse, even though the evidence against them looks damning? Take a second to think what you would believe in this situation.但证据确凿：在凶器上发现了他的指纹。你的配偶坚称他是无辜的。“我知道这看起来很糟糕，”他说，“但你必须相信我！如果你都不相信我，还有谁会相信我？”你应该相信你的配偶吗，即使对他们不利的证据看起来很可怕？花点时间想想在这种情况下你会相信什么。This dilemma is part of what philosophers call the ethics of belief: a field of study that explores how we ought to form beliefs, and whether we have ethical duties to believe certain things. The question here isn't about what you should do, such as whether or not you should find your spouse guilty in a court of law. After all, you wouldn’t be on the jury in their trial! Rather, it’s about what you should believe to be true. So, what factors should you consider?这种困境是哲学家们所说的信仰伦理学的一部分：这是一个研究领域，探索我们应该如何形成信仰，以及我们是否有道德义务相信某些事情。这里的问题不是你应该做什么，比如你是否应该在法庭上判定你的配偶有罪。毕竟，在他们的审判中，你不能成为陪审团成员！相反，它是关于你应该相信什么是真的。那么，你应该考虑哪些因素？Perhaps the most obvious is your evidence. After all, to believe something is to take it to be true. And evidence is, by definition, all information that helps us determine what's true. From this, some philosophers draw the conclusion that evidence is the only thing that ought to determine what you believe. This view is called evidentialism, and a strict evidentialist would say it doesn’t matter that the accused is your spouse. 也许最明显的是你的证据。毕竟，相信一件事就是相信它是真的。根据定义，证据是帮助我们确定什么是真实的所有信息。由此，一些哲学家得出结论，证据是唯一应该决定你相信什么的东西。这种观点被称为证据主义，严格的证据主义者会说，被告是你的配偶并不重要。You should evaluate the evidence from a neutral, objective point of view. Taking the perspective of an unbiased third party, your judgment of your spouse's character is a relevant consideration. But finding their fingerprints at the crime scene is surely stronger evidence. So, from an evidentialist point of view, you should either believe your spouse is guilty, or at best remain undecided.你应该从中立、客观的角度评估证据。从公正的第三方的角度来看，你对配偶性格的判断是一个相关的考虑因素。但在犯罪现场找到他们的指纹无疑是更有力的证据。因此，从证据主义者的角度来看，你要么相信你的配偶有罪，要么充其量只是犹豫不决。Some philosophers present evidentialism only as a view of what’s most rational to believe. But others, like 19th century evidentialist W.K. Clifford, think that following the evidence is also morally required. 一些哲学家提出的证据主义只是作为一种观点，认为什么是最合理的相信。但其他人，如19世纪的证据学家W.K.Clifford，认为遵循证据在道德上也是必要的。One argument for this view is that having well-informed, accurate beliefs is often vitally important to determining the ethical way to act. Another argument is that there’s something unethical about being dishonest, and refusing to follow the evidence is a way of being dishonest with oneself.这种观点的一个论点是，拥有消息灵通、准确的信念对于确定道德行为方式通常至关重要。另一个论点是，不诚实是不道德的，拒绝遵循证据是对自己不诚实的一种方式。However, perhaps there are other ethical factors in play. Although the evidence against your spouse is strong, there’s still a chance that they’re actually innocent. Think for a moment about how it would feel to be innocent, and have no one believe you— not even your own partner! By not trusting your spouse, you run the risk of seriously hurting them in their crucial hour of need. 然而，也许还有其他道德因素在起作用。尽管有确凿的证据证明你的配偶是无辜的，但他们仍然有可能是无辜的。想一想，如果你是无辜的，没有人相信你，甚至没有人相信你自己的伴侣，那会是什么感觉！如果不信任你的配偶，你就有可能在他们需要帮助的关键时刻严重伤害他们。Moreover, consider what this lack of trust would do to your marriage. It would be incredibly difficult to continue a loving relationship with someone that you believed— or even strongly suspected— was a murderer. You might try to pretend to believe that your spouse is innocent, but could you really go on living that lie?此外，想想这种缺乏信任会对你的婚姻产生什么影响。与一个你认为——甚至强烈怀疑——是杀人犯的人保持爱的关系是极其困难的。你可能会假装相信你的配偶是无辜的，但你真的能继续生活在那个谎言中吗？According to a theory of the ethics of belief called pragmatism, these kinds of practical considerations can sometimes make it right to believe something even without strong evidence. Some pragmatists would even say that you morally owe it to your spouse to believe them.根据一种称为实用主义的信仰伦理理论，即使没有强有力的证据，这些实际考虑有时也能使人们正确地相信某事。一些实用主义者甚至会说，从道德上讲，你应该让你的配偶相信他们。But is it even possible to believe your spouse is innocent just because you think it’ll be good for your relationship? Or because you think you owe it to the accused? You might desperately want to believe they’re innocent, but can you control your beliefs in the same way you control your actions? It seems like you can’t just believe whatever you like when the truth is staring you in the face. 但是，仅仅因为你认为这对你们的关系有好处，就有可能相信你的配偶是无辜的吗？还是因为你认为你欠被告的？你可能拼命地想相信他们是无辜的，但你能像控制自己的行为那样控制自己的信念吗？当真相摆在你面前时，你似乎不能随便相信你喜欢的人。But on the other hand, recall your spouse’s plea. When we say things like this, we seem to be assuming that it is possible to control our beliefs in some way. So what do you think? Can you control what beliefs you have? And if so, what will you believe about your spouse?但另一方面，回想一下你配偶的抗辩。当我们这样说的时候，我们似乎在假设有可能以某种方式控制我们的信仰。你觉得呢？你能控制自己的信仰吗？如果是这样，你会相信你的配偶吗？
来源：TED演讲
TED演讲160篇+
千万不要低估"童年创伤"，它会极大影响我们的一生!