你该如何面对艰难选择演讲稿(2)

　　It's a mistake to think that in hard choices, one alternative really is better than the other, but we're too stupid to know which, and since we don't know which, we might as well take the least risky option. Even taking two alternatives side by side with full information, a choice can still be hard. Hard choices are hard not because of us or our ignorance; they're hard because there is no best option.

　　我们不应该认为，在艰难抉择中某种选择总会会比另一种好，可我们自身太愚蠢，所以无法辨别，那既然我们无法定夺，倒不如选风险最小的那项。就算你完全了解了两种选项并将其一一对照，你仍然很难决定。选择之所以难，不是因为我们无知;难的原因在于没有最优选项。

　　Now, if there's no best option, if the scales don't tip in favor of one alternative over another, then surely the alternatives must be equally good. So maybe the right thing to say in hard choices is that they're between equally good options. But that can't be right. If alternatives are equally good, you should just flip a coin between them, and it seems a mistake to think, here's how you should decide between careers, places to live, people to marry: Flip a coin.

　　那么，如果没有最佳项，如果衡量的天秤不会倾向于 任何一方，那么任何选项都一定是好的。所以面对艰难抉择，可能正确的思维方式，就是认为选项双方一样好。这种想法肯定不对。如果选项都一样好，那还不如直接抛硬币算了，这样就会产生思想误区，让你认为自己选择事业、住处、婚嫁时都抛硬币选择就好了。

　　There's another reason for thinking that hard choices aren't choices between equally good options. Suppose you have a choice between two jobs: you could be an investment banker or a graphic artist. There are a variety of things that matter in such a choice, like the excitement of the work, achieving financial security,having time to raise a family, and so on.

　　还有另外一个原因，使艰难选择并非是在同等好的选项中抉择。 假设你要在两份工作中挑选： 你可以做投资银行家，或做平面设计师。在这个选择当中有颇多决定性因素，譬如工作带来的兴奋程度、能获得的经济保障、顾家时间等等。

　　Maybe the artist's career puts you on the cutting edge of new forms of pictorial expression. Maybe the banking career puts you on the cutting edge of new forms of financial manipulation.

　　也许艺术家这个职业能让你接触最前沿的图像表达技术。或许当银行家你就能接触最前端的金融操纵手段。你可以想象任何两种你喜欢的职业，但两者都不会比另一方好的。

　　Imagine the two jobs however you like, so that neither is better than the other.Now suppose we improve one of them, a bit. Suppose the bank, wooing you, adds 500 dollars a month to your salary. Does the extra money now make the banking job better than the artist one? Not necessarily. A higher salary makes the banking job better than it was before, but it might not be enough to make being a banker better than being an artist.

　　现在，假设我们能稍微改进其中的一方。假设一间银行尝试讨好你，在你的月薪里增加500美元。这一笔额外的金钱会不会让这份银行家的工作优于当艺术家呢?说不准。更高的薪酬让银行家的工作优于以前，但额外薪水不一定足够让成为银行家变得比成为艺术家好。

　　But if an improvement in one of the jobs doesn't make it better than the other, then the two original jobs could not have been equally good. If you start with two things that are equally good, and you improve one of them, it now must be better than the other. That's not the case with options in hard choices.

　　可如果对其中一种职业进行改进后结果并没有让一方优于另一方，那么两种选择本身就不可能是一样好。如果两件事一开始都同等的好 ，当你改进了其中一件，那它就一定会优于另一个。在艰难抉择中并非如此。

　　So now we've got a puzzle. We've got two jobs. Neither is better than the other, nor are they equally good.So how are we supposed to choose? Something seems to have gone wrong here. Maybe the choice itself is problematic, and comparison is impossible. But that can't be right. It's not like we're trying to choose between two things that can't be compared. We're weighing the merits of two jobs, after all, not the merits of the number nine and a plate of fried eggs. A comparison of the overall merits of two jobs is something we can make, and one we often do make.

　　那么现在我们就有一个疑惑了。这两份工作，没有一方能完胜另一方，但又不是同等的好。究竟该怎么选择呢? 貌似有些事情出错了。可能选项的本身就存在问题，导致我们无法比较。但这也不对啊。我们并不是要在两种不能被对比的事物间选择。我们说到底是在衡量两份工作的利弊，不是对比数字9和 一盘煎鸡蛋的好处。对比两份工作的总体优势是我们能做到的，也是我们经常做的事。

　　I think the puzzle arises because of an unreflective assumption we make about value. We unwittingly assume that values like justice, beauty, kindness, are akin to scientific quantities, like length, mass and weight. Take any comparative question not involving value, such as which of two suitcases is heavier. There are only three possibilities.

　　我认为疑惑产生的原因源于一种我们对价值的草率设想。我们不知不觉地认为，诸如正义、美丽、善良的价值观都与一些科学度量类似，都能被量度，譬如长度、质量、重量。试想一个与价值观毫不相关的比较，例如两个行李箱中哪个更重。仅有三种可能性。

　　The weight of one is greater, lesser or equal to the weight of the other. Properties like weight can be represented by real numbers -- one, two, three and so on -- and there are only three possible comparisons between any two real numbers. One number is greater, lesser, or equal to the other.Not so with values.

　　其中一个的重量大于、小于 或等于另一个。像重量这样的性质能够用真实的数字来表达——1,2,3…… 而且在两个数字间的比较中只有三种可能。一个数字大于、小于或等于另一个数字价值观却不是如此。

　　As post-Enlightenment creatures, we tend to assume that scientific thinking holds the key to everything of importance in our world, but the world of value is different from the world of science. The stuff of the one world can be quantified by real numbers. The stuff of the other world can't. We shouldn't assume that the world of is, of lengths and weights, has the same structure as the world of ought, of what we should do.