【Using English】27 - The Art of L

来源: http://www.raptitude.com/2016/02/the-art-of-letting-others-be-right

My brain, like all brains, houses an unbelievable quantity of remembered information, and a huge amount of that information is stuff I’ve watched on television. I always hated Star Trek, and frequently said so, but whenever I catch a clip of The Next Generation, somehow I’ve seen that episode before.

I was also never exactly a fan of The Oprah Winfrey Show, but I’ve surely seen several hundred hours of it. For years after it went off the air, I kept remembering a particular insight Oprah shared once. I forget the context, but Oprah was amazed to realize that she didn’t have to answer the phone just because it was ringing.

It was a significant insight to me too, not because answering the phone is a particularly difficult task, but because it meant there was an invisible freedom there, which I somehow didn’t realize I had. Even if I still answered every call, it felt like a choice. Before that, it had been a kind of a master-slave type relationship, in which some remote person could push some buttons and force my body up onto its feet (perhaps tearing me away from a Star Trek rerun).

Star Trek 星际迷航

clip 剪辑

episode 插曲

master-slave 主从

我的大脑像所有大脑一样，拥有难以置信的大量记忆信息，并且大量信息是我在电视上观看过的东西。我总是讨厌“星际迷航”，并经常这样说，但每当我抓到下一代的剪辑，不知何故，我已经看过这集。

我也从来不是“奥普拉温弗瑞秀”的粉丝，但我肯定已经看过几百小时了。多年后，我一直记得奥普拉曾经分享过的一个特殊见解。我忘记了上下文，但奥普拉很惊讶地意识到，她不必因为响铃而接电话。

这对我来说也是一个重要的见解，不是因为回答电话是一项特别困难的任务，而是因为这意味着那里有一种无形的自由，我不知道自己有什么自由。即使我仍然回答每一个电话，这感觉就像是一种选择。在那之前，它是一种主从式的关系，在这种关系中，一些偏远的人可以推动一些按钮，强迫我的身体站立起来（也许会让我远离星际迷航重新运行）。

I am slowly grasping another overlooked freedom, which is the freedom to let people be right (or at least feel right) even though I think they’re wrong. When someone tries to tell the world that Crash is a brilliant film, or that evolution is “just a theory”, I forget that I am free to let them continue to think so.

I gather I have a long history of arguing my views, even when I’m not sure why I’m doing it. One time I was respectfully disagreeing with a coworker about something, and after a particularly good point I made, his tone went from sporting to angry and he said, “you are one argumentative person!” I told him he was wrong, but later wondered for a few seconds if I was indeed argumentative. No, he was the argumentative one. Otherwise he would have realized I was right.

overlooked 忽视的

gather 猜想

coworker 同事

tone 音

我正在慢慢地掌握另一种被忽视的自由，即让我们认为他们错了，让人们变得正确（或者至少感觉正确）的自由。 当有人试图告诉世界Crash是一部辉煌的电影，或者演变是“仅仅是一种理论”时，我忘记了我可以自由地让他们继续这样认为。

我收集到我有很长的争论我的观点的历史，即使我不确定我为什么要这样做。 有一次，我对某个同事有点不以为然，并且在我提出一个特别好的观点之后，他的语气从运动变成了愤怒，他说：“你是一个有争议的人！”我告诉他他错了，但后来想知道 如果我确实有争议的话，那么几秒钟。 不，他是论证性的。 否则，他会意识到我是对的。

And this was before the internet was omnipresent in our lives, before it started joining us in the bathroom, back when “going online” was still just an activity you did for part of the day, rather than an additional mode of global perception we can activate at any moment. The typical person experienced far fewer moments in which it felt appropriate to argue a point beyond what politeness allows.

Today, it’s alarmingly easy to find yourself antler-locked with some remote, faceless person who’s trying to tell you that universal healthcare is a communist plot, while you’re waiting for your potato to finish microwaving. This facelessness turns up our impulse to argue even more. You may have noticed it’s a lot less pleasant to argue with someone when you can see their eyes.

I suppose many of you have no idea what I’m talking about. You see a statement you don’t agree with, or you know to be factually wrong, and it creates no urge in you to correct, illuminate or scold, even in your head. You could hear someone praising Nancy Grace as a selfless defender of the vulnerable, or arguing that Godfather III was as good as the others, and yet feel no desire to try to get them to stop thinking that. You are wise enough to know that “fighting the good fight” in internet comment threads is almost always pure indulgence, and just gives ignorance a reason to sink anchors and get louder.

单词

omnipresent：无所不在的

factual：事实的

perception 知觉

urge：强烈欲望

scold：责骂

indulgence：纵容

politeness 礼貌

alarmingly 惊人地

plot 情节

impulse 冲动

factually 事实上

illuminate 照亮

praising 赞美

defender 辩护人

vulnerable 弱势群体

而这之前，互联网在我们的生活中无处不在，在它开始加入我们的浴室之前，当“上网”仍然只是你在一天的某个时间所做的活动，而不是一种额外的全球认知模式，我们可以随时激活。典型的人经历的时间少得多，因为它认为适当地争论一个超出礼貌允许的点。

今天，当你正在等待你的马铃薯完成微波处理时，发现自己与一些偏远的，不露面的人试图告诉你，普遍的医疗保健是一个共产主义阴谋非常容易。这种无视变成了我们争论更多的冲动。你可能已经注意到，当你能够看到他们的眼睛时，与某人辩论是不太愉快的。

我想你们中许多人不知道我在说什么。你看到一个你不同意的陈述，或者你知道事实上是错误的，并且它不会促使你纠正，照亮或责骂你，即使在你的脑海中。你可以听到有人赞扬南希格雷斯是弱势群体的无私捍卫者，或者认为教父三世和其他人一样好，但却没有试图让他们停止思考的愿望。你足够聪明，知道在互联网评论主题中“打好斗”几乎总是纯粹的放纵，只是让无知成为沉船的理由而变得越来越响亮。

But many of us aren’t so wise. Those argumentative souls among us that do engage, (and there are zillions of us, based on the comment totals on Facebook and YouTube alone) often believe we are somehow actually changing minds, actually eradicating ignorance and thoughtlessness. We aren’t indulging in a destructive or at least useless pastime, we’re saving the world from wrongness, one faceless Reddit user at a time. It’s not just okay to engage in these little conflicts, it’s a moral imperative. We can’t just allow ignorance to go on unopposed. The internet (well the whole world really, but it’s easiest on the internet) must be patrolled for bad beliefs.

And of course, it seldom occurs to us that we’re wrong. Maybe all my sources are incorrect, and we do swallow eight spiders a year in our sleep. But in the heat of enthusiastic wrong-righting, it never occurs to you that you’re the problem, or at least part of it. Being wrong feels exactly like being right, which is the sole feeling experienced by all parties, in any argument, about anything.

For those of us inclined to argue every point, it’s easy to forget that we have the freedom to simply carry on with our lives and let “wrong” viewpoints stand. It’s amazing how often it can seem like an exchange needs your input, the way a screaming kettle needs to be taken off the element.

zillion：极多

eradicate：根除

patrol：巡视；侦察

element：电阻丝

但我们很多人并不那么明智。那些参与其中（我们中有无数人是基于Facebook和YouTube上的评论总数）的那些争论的灵魂常常相信我们实际上正在改变思想，实际上消除了无知和无视。我们并没有沉迷于破坏性的或至少无用的消遣，我们正在从错误中拯救世界，一次只有一个匿名的Reddit用户。参与这些小冲突并不仅仅是可以的，这是道德上的必要。我们不能让无知无视自己。互联网（真的是全世界的，但它是互联网上最简单的）必须由不良信仰进行巡逻。

当然，我们很少发生我们错了。也许我所有的来源都是不正确的，我们每年睡眠时都会吞下八只蜘蛛。但是，在热烈的错误纠正中，你永远不会觉得你是问题，或者至少是其中的一部分。错误的感觉就像是正确的，这是所有参与者在任何争论中遇到的唯一感受。

对于我们这些倾向于争论每一点的人来说，很容易忘记我们有自由去继续我们的生活，让“错​​误”的观点站得住脚。令人惊讶的是，交易所看起来多么像一个交易所需要您的投入，而尖叫的水壶需要从这个元素中分离出来。

But it’s not the same. A different viewpoint, no matter how egregious it seems, is no emergency. Civilization survived for over 10,000 years before you and I got here with our snarky corrections and condescending rebuttals, and we didn’t exactly make a huge difference when we did arrive. It turns out we don’t have to try to stop people from thinking what we don’t want them to think, and that our energy is probably better spent elsewhere.

In other words, it is possible, theoretically, to retire from Belief Patrol.

I know beliefs have consequences in the real world. Harmful actions come from bad beliefs. I’m not claiming that we should never oppose anyone, never call anyone out, never engage with people who disagree with us. I just don’t think that casually sparring with blowhards on social media, or even in real life, actually affects anyone’s beliefs in a helpful way.

egregious：极坏的; 极恶劣的

emergency 紧急事件

Civilization 文明

rebuttals 反驳

consequence 意义

elsewhere 别处

call someone out 挑战某人，挑衅

但它不一样。 不同的观点，无论看起来多么令人震惊，都不是紧急情况。 在我们到达这里之前，文明经历了超过一万年的时间，我们用我们狡猾的改正和居高临下的反驳来到这里，而当我们到达时，我们并没有发生很大的变化。 事实证明，我们不必设法阻止人们思考我们不希望他们想的事情，并且我们的能量可能更好地花在其他地方。

换句话说，理论上说，从信仰巡逻队退休是可能的。

我知道信仰在现实世界中有后果。 有害行为来自不良信仰。 我并不是说我们不应该反对任何人，也不要打电话给任何人，也不要和那些不同意我们的人交往。 我不认为随便在社交媒体上甚至在现实生活中随口吐露，实际上会以有益的方式影响任何人的信仰。

I think Richard Carlson’s advice is probably an ideal motto for this: Let others be “right” most of the time. Asserting and defending our views takes an enormous amount of mental energy and accomplishes little. Sometimes it’s important (and actually useful) to take a stand in a conversation, but usually it’s just a kind of peace-destroying indulgence.

By “retiring from Belief Patrol”, I’m talking mostly about retiring from having non-face-to-face arguments in which there’s no mutual respect. The moment the motivation slips from goodwill to ill-will or annoyance, I’m done.

I hope. I hope I will notice the impulse before the words come out. It can be so automatic. Once you start to consider retirement, it’s unnerving how attractive it is to say something, to throw in your “Well ACTUALLY…”

It’s like being the hard-boiled TV vice cop whose family convinced him to retire, but then without realizing it, ends up embroiled in some wild crime adventure, following clues and chasing crooks across rooftops. He ends up back in that world, fistfighting a drug dealer on top of a moving train, not because he consciously decided to go back to the grind, but because his detective instincts were sharper than his awareness of what he was doing.

motto 座右铭

Asserting 断言

unnerving 令人不安的

embroil：使卷入(战斗或争论)

grind：苦差事

我认为理查德卡尔森的建议可能是一个理想的座右铭：让别人在大多数时间都是“正确的”。断言和捍卫我们的观点需要大量的精力，并且完成得很少。有时在谈话中表达立场是重要的（并且实际上是有用的），但通常这只是一种和平的放纵。

通过“从信仰巡逻队退休”，我主要谈论的是退休时没有相互尊重的非面对面争论。当动机从善意转变为恶意或烦恼时，我就完成了。

我希望。我希望在词汇出来之前我会注意到冲动。它可以是如此自动的。一旦你开始考虑退休，说些什么有多吸引力，把你的“实际上......”

这就像是一个热血沸腾的电视副警察，他的家人说服他退休，但之后却没有意识到，最终卷入了一些野蛮的犯罪冒险，追踪线索并在屋顶追逐骗子。他最终回到了这个世界，在一列移动的火车上为一个毒贩争斗，这并不是因为他有意识地决定回去研究，而是因为他的侦探本能比他意识到自己在做什么更清晰。

So we’ll see how things go in retirement. Already I’m noticing how often the impulse comes up. I’ve deleted so many half-written Reddit replies that I wonder if I ever contributed anything other than contradiction and snark.

I invite you to join me, if you’re a long-time Belief Patrol veteran. Let’s leave the swashbuckling game for good and go play tennis. We can still express our views in a thousand other ways that aren’t so indulgent and harsh. You have this freedom, and I don’t blame you if you didn’t see it. Already I can tell you it’s way better to be retired. But I won’t argue the point.

contradiction 矛盾

swashbuckling 虚张声势的

indulgent 放纵的

harsh 苛刻的

所以我们会看看退休后的情况。 我已经注意到冲动出现的频率。 我删除了很多一半的Reddit的回复，我不知道除了矛盾和咆哮之外，我是否还有其他贡献。

我邀请你加入我，如果你是一位长期信仰巡逻队的老兵。 让我们暂时离开游戏，然后去打网球。 我们仍然可以用其他一些不那么放纵和苛刻的方式来表达我们的观点。 你有这种自由，如果你没有看到它，我不会责怪你。 我已经可以告诉你退休的方式会更好。 但我不会争辩这一点。