TED日本語 - デイヴィッド・ブルックス: 社会的動物

TED日本語

TED Talks(英語 日本語字幕付き動画)

TED日本語 - デイヴィッド・ブルックス: 社会的動物

TED Talks

社会的動物
The social animal
デイヴィッド・ブルックス
David Brooks

内容

ニューヨークタイムズのコラムニスト、デイヴィッド・ブルックスが彼の最新の著書の中から人間の本質へのこれまでにない洞察を、認知科学の面から紹介します。それは経済、政治そして私たち一人一人の自己認識に至るまで非常に応用範囲の広いものです。ユーモアをふんだんにまじえたトークで、彼は人間を理解する上で意識と無意識を切り離して考えることはできないと説明します。

Script

When I got my current job, I was given a good piece of advice, which was to interview three politicians every day. And from that much contact with politicians, I can tell you they're all emotional freaks of one sort or another. They have what I called "logorrhea dementia," which is they talk so much they drive themselves insane. (Laughter) But what they do have is incredible social skills. When you meet them, they lock into you, they look you in the eye, they invade your personal space, they massage the back of your head.

I had dinner with a Republican senator several months ago who kept his hand on my inner thigh throughout the whole meal -- squeezing it. I once -- this was years ago -- I saw Ted Kennedy and Dan Quayle meet in the well of the Senate. And they were friends, and they hugged each other and they were laughing, and their faces were like this far apart. And they were moving and grinding and moving their arms up and down each other. And I was like, "Get a room. I don't want to see this." But they have those social skills.

Another case: Last election cycle, I was following Mitt Romney around New Hampshire, and he was campaigning with his five perfect sons: Bip, Chip, Rip, Zip, Lip and Dip. (Laughter) And he's going into a diner. And he goes into the diner, introduces himself to a family and says, "What village are you from in New Hampshire?" And then he describes the home he owned in their village. And so he goes around the room, and then as he's leaving the diner, he first-names almost everybody he's just met. I was like, "Okay, that's social skill."

But the paradox is, when a lot of these people slip into the policy-making mode, that social awareness vanishes and they start talking like accountants. So in the course of my career, I have covered a series of failures. We sent economists in the Soviet Union with privatization plans when it broke up, and what they really lacked was social trust. We invaded Iraq with a military oblivious to the cultural and psychological realities. We had a financial regulatory regime based on the assumptions that traders were rational creatures who wouldn't do anything stupid. For 30 years, I've been covering school reform and we've basically reorganized the bureaucratic boxes -- charters, private schools, vouchers -- but we've had disappointing results year after year. And the fact is, people learn from people they love. And if you're not talking about the individual relationship between a teacher and a student, you're not talking about that reality. But that reality is expunged from our policy-making process.

And so that's led to a question for me: Why are the most socially-attuned people on earth completely dehumanized when they think about policy? And I came to the conclusion, this is a symptom of a larger problem. That, for centuries, we've inherited a view of human nature based on the notion that we're divided selves, that reason is separated from the emotions and that society progresses to the extent that reason can suppress the passions. And it's led to a view of human nature that we're rational individuals who respond in straightforward ways to incentives, and it's led to ways of seeing the world where people try to use the assumptions of physics to measure how human behavior is. And it's produced a great amputation, a shallow view of human nature.

We're really good at talking about material things, but we're really bad at talking about emotions. We're really good at talking about skills and safety and health; we're really bad at talking about character. Alasdair MacIntyre, the famous philosopher, said that, "We have the concepts of the ancient morality of virtue, honor, goodness, but we no longer have a system by which to connect them." And so this has led to a shallow path in politics, but also in a whole range of human endeavors.

You can see it in the way we raise our young kids. You go to an elementary school at three in the afternoon and you watch the kids come out, and they're wearing these 80-pound backpacks. If the wind blows them over, they're like beetles stuck there on the ground. You see these cars that drive up -- usually it's Saabs and Audis and Volvos, because in certain neighborhoods it's socially acceptable to have a luxury car, so long as it comes from a country hostile to U.S. foreign policy -- that's fine. They get picked up by these creatures I've called uber-moms, who are highly successful career women who have taken time off to make sure all their kids get into Harvard. And you can usually tell the uber-moms because they actually weigh less than their own children. (Laughter) So at the moment of conception, they're doing little butt exercises. Babies flop out, they're flashing Mandarin flashcards at the things.

Driving them home, and they want them to be enlightened, so they take them to Ben & Jerry's ice cream company with its own foreign policy. In one of my books, I joke that Ben & Jerry's should make a pacifist toothpaste -- doesn't kill germs, just asks them to leave. It would be a big seller.

(Laughter) And they go to Whole Foods to get their baby formula, and Whole Foods is one of those progressive grocery stores where all the cashiers look like they're on loan from Amnesty International. (Laughter) They buy these seaweed-based snacks there called Veggie Booty with Kale, which is for kids who come home and say, "Mom, mom, I want a snack that'll help prevent colon-rectal cancer." (Laughter)

And so the kids are raised in a certain way, jumping through achievement hoops of the things we can measure -- SAT prep, oboe, soccer practice. They get into competitive colleges, they get good jobs, and sometimes they make a success of themselves in a superficial manner, and they make a ton of money. And sometimes you can see them at vacation places like Jackson Hole or Aspen. And they've become elegant and slender -- they don't really have thighs; they just have one elegant calve on top of another. (Laughter) They have kids of their own, and they've achieved a genetic miracle by marrying beautiful people, so their grandmoms look like Gertrude Stein, their daughters looks like Halle Berry -- I don't know how they've done that. They get there and they realize it's fashionable now to have dogs a third as tall as your ceiling heights. So they've got these furry 160-pound dogs -- all look like velociraptors, all named after Jane Austen characters.

And then when they get old, they haven't really developed a philosophy of life, but they've decided, "I've been successful at everything; I'm just not going to die." And so they hire personal trainers; they're popping Cialis like breath mints. You see them on the mountains up there. They're cross-country skiing up the mountain with these grim expressions that make Dick Cheney look like Jerry Lewis.

(Laughter) And as they whiz by you, it's like being passed by a little iron Raisinet going up the hill. (Laughter)

And so this is part of what life is, but it's not all of what life is. And over the past few years, I think we've been given a deeper view of human nature and a deeper view of who we are. And it's not based on theology or philosophy, it's in the study of the mind, across all these spheres of research, from neuroscience to the cognitive scientists, behavioral economists, psychologists, sociology, we're developing a revolution in consciousness. And when you synthesize it all, it's giving us a new view of human nature. And far from being a coldly materialistic view of nature, it's a new humanism, it's a new enchantment. And I think when you synthesize this research, you start with three key insights.

The first insight is that while the conscious mind writes the autobiography of our species, the unconscious mind does most of the work. And so one way to formulate that is the human mind can take in millions of pieces of information a minute, of which it can be consciously aware of about 40. And this leads to oddities. One of my favorite is that people named Dennis are disproportionately likely to become dentists, people named Lawrence become lawyers, because unconsciously we gravitate toward things that sound familiar, which is why I named my daughter President of the United States Brooks. (Laughter) Another finding is that the unconscious, far from being dumb and sexualized, is actually quite smart. So one of the most cognitively demanding things we do is buy furniture. It's really hard to imagine a sofa, how it's going to look in your house. And the way you should do that is study the furniture, let it marinate in your mind, distract yourself, and then a few days later, go with your gut, because unconsciously you've figured it out.

The second insight is that emotions are at the center of our thinking. People with strokes and lesions in the emotion-processing parts of the brain are not super smart, they're actually sometimes quite helpless. And the "giant" in the field is in the room tonight and is speaking tomorrow morning -- Antonio Damasio. And one of the things he's really shown us is that emotions are not separate from reason, but they are the foundation of reason because they tell us what to value. And so reading and educating your emotions is one of the central activities of wisdom.

Now I'm a middle-aged guy. I'm not exactly comfortable with emotions. One of my favorite brain stories described these middle-aged guys. They put them into a brain scan machine -- this is apocryphal by the way, but I don't care -- and they had them watch a horror movie, and then they had them describe their feelings toward their wives. And the brain scans were identical in both activities. It was just sheer terror. So me talking about emotion is like Gandhi talking about gluttony, but it is the central organizing process of the way we think. It tells us what to imprint. The brain is the record of the feelings of a life.

And the third insight is that we're not primarily self-contained individuals. We're social animals, not rational animals. We emerge out of relationships, and we are deeply interpenetrated,one with another. And so when we see another person, we reenact in our own minds what we see in their minds. When we watch a car chase in a movie, it's almost as if we are subtly having a car chase. When we watch pornography, it's a little like having sex, though probably not as good. And we see this when lovers walk down the street, when a crowd in Egypt or Tunisia gets caught up in an emotional contagion, the deep interpenetration. And this revolution in who we are gives us a different way of seeing, I think, politics, a different way, most importantly, of seeing human capital.

We are now children of the French Enlightenment. We believe that reason is the highest of the faculties. But I think this research shows that the British Enlightenment, or the Scottish Enlightenment, with David Hume, Adam Smith, actually had a better handle on who we are -- that reason is often weak, our sentiments are strong, and our sentiments are often trustworthy. And this work corrects that bias in our culture, that dehumanizing bias. It gives us a deeper sense of what it actually takes for us to thrive in this life. When we think about human capital we think about the things we can measure easily -- things like grades, SAT's, degrees, the number of years in schooling. What it really takes to do well, to lead a meaningful life, are things that are deeper, things we don't really even have words for. And so let me list just a couple of the things I think this research points us toward trying to understand.

The first gift, or talent, is mindsight -- the ability to enter into other people's minds and learn what they have to offer. Babies come with this ability. Meltzoff, who's at the University of Washington, leaned over a baby who was 43 minutes old. He wagged his tongue at the baby. The baby wagged her tongue back. Babies are born to interpenetrate into Mom's mind and to download what they find -- their models of how to understand reality. In the United States,55 percent of babies have a deep two-way conversation with Mom and they learn models to how to relate to other people. And those people who have models of how to relate have a huge head start in life. Scientists at the University of Minnesota did a study in which they could predict with 77 percent accuracy, at age 18 months, who was going to graduate from high school, based on who had good attachment with mom. Twenty percent of kids do not have those relationships. They are what we call avoidantly attached. They have trouble relating to other people. They go through life like sailboats tacking into the wind -- wanting to get close to people, but not really having the models of how to do that. And so this is one skill of how to hoover up knowledge,one from another.

A second skill is equal poise, the ability to have the serenity to read the biases and failures in your own mind. So for example, we are overconfidence machines. Ninety-five percent of our professors report that they are above-average teachers. Ninety-six percent of college students say they have above-average social skills. Time magazine asked Americans, "Are you in the top one percent of earners?" Nineteen percent of Americans are in the top one percent of earners. (Laughter) This is a gender-linked trait, by the way. Men drown at twice the rate of women, because men think they can swim across that lake. But some people have the ability and awareness of their own biases, their own overconfidence. They have epistemological modesty. They are open-minded in the face of ambiguity. They are able to adjust strength of the conclusions to the strength of their evidence. They are curious. And these traits are often unrelated and uncorrelated with IQ.

The third trait is metis, what we might call street smarts -- it's a Greek word. It's a sensitivity to the physical environment, the ability to pick out patterns in an environment -- derive a gist. One of my colleagues at the Times did a great story about soldiers in Iraq who could look down a street and detect somehow whether there was an IED, a landmine, in the street. They couldn't tell you how they did it, but they could feel cold, they felt a coldness, and they were more often right than wrong. The third is what you might call sympathy, the ability to work within groups. And that comes in tremendously handy, because groups are smarter than individuals. And face-to-face groups are much smarter than groups that communicate electronically, because 90 percent of our communication is non-verbal. And the effectiveness of a group is not determined by the IQ of the group; it's determined by how well they communicate, how often they take turns in conversation.

Then you could talk about a trait like blending. Any child can say, "I'm a tiger," pretend to be a tiger. It seems so elementary. But in fact, it's phenomenally complicated to take a concept "I" and a concept "tiger" and blend them together. But this is the source of innovation. What Picasso did, for example, was take the concept "Western art" and the concept "African masks" and blend them together -- not only the geometry, but the moral systems entailed in them. And these are skills, again, we can't count and measure.

And then the final thing I'll mention is something you might call limerence. And this is not an ability; it's a drive and a motivation. The conscious mind hungers for success and prestige. The unconscious mind hungers for those moments of transcendence, when the skull line disappears and we are lost in a challenge or a task -- when a craftsman feels lost in his craft, when a naturalist feels at one with nature, when a believer feels at one with God's love. That is what the unconscious mind hungers for. And many of us feel it in love when lovers feel fused.

And one of the most beautiful descriptions I've come across in this research of how minds interpenetrate was written by a great theorist and scientist named Douglas Hofstadter at the University of Indiana. He was married to a woman named Carol, and they had a wonderful relationship. When their kids were five and two, Carol had a stroke and a brain tumor and died suddenly. And Hofstadter wrote a book called "I Am a Strange Loop." In the course of that book, he describes a moment -- just months after Carol has died -- he comes across her picture on the mantel, or on a bureau in his bedroom.

And here's what he wrote: "I looked at her face, and I looked so deeply that I felt I was behind her eyes. And all at once I found myself saying as tears flowed, 'That's me. That's me.' And those simple words brought back many thoughts that I had had before, about the fusion of our souls into one higher-level entity, about the fact that at the core of both our souls lay our identical hopes and dreams for our children, about the notion that those hopes were not separate or distinct hopes, but were just one hope,one clear thing that defined us both, that welded us into a unit -- the kind of unit I had but dimly imagined before being married and having children. I realized that, though Carol had died, that core piece of her had not died at all, but had lived on very determinedly in my brain."

The Greeks say we suffer our way to wisdom. Through his suffering, Hofstadter understood how deeply interpenetrated we are. Through the policy failures of the last 30 years, we have come to acknowledge, I think, how shallow our view of human nature has been. And now as we confront that shallowness and the failures that derive from our inability to get the depths of who we are, comes this revolution in consciousness -- these people in so many fields exploring the depth of our nature and coming away with this enchanted, this new humanism. And when Freud discovered his sense of the unconscious, it had a vast effect on the climate of the times. Now we are discovering a more accurate vision of the unconscious, of who we are deep inside, and it's going to have a wonderful and profound and humanizing effect on our culture.

Thank you.

(Applause)

その昔 毎日政治家と話す機会があり 大変勉強になりました そうした経験を通して 感情面で変人だ と感じました おしゃべり症候群です しゃべり過ぎて 頭が変になってます (笑) しかし彼らは本当に社交術に長けてます 会ったとたんガチっとつかまえて 目を見て話をして 後頭部をさすりながら 心の隙間に入り込みます

ある議員と夕食の機会がありまして 食事の間 ずっと私の内ももに 手を入れてギューっとされましたよ かなり前ですが ある議員をみかけました 彼らは ハグをして 笑いながら こんな近くで話すんです お互いの両腕を上へ下へと さすり合うんです 「他でやってくれ!」 とにかく社交術に長けてます

ほかには 前回の選挙の時 ミット・ロムニーを取材してました 5人の息子と選挙を活動をしてました ビップ チップ リップとその他たくさん (笑) ダイナーに入って ある家族に自己紹介しました 「どちらから?」と聞き 「そこには自宅があるんですよ!」 店じゅうでそうやって ダイナーから出ていきました 初対面の人たちをファーストネームで呼んでました 「これこそ社交術」

変なのは 政策を作る段階になると 人間味がふっとんで 急に会計士にみたいになることです キャリアを通じて いくつもの失敗を取材してきました アメリカはソ連の民営化のため エコノミストを送り込み 失敗 必要だったのは信頼関係でした アメリカは文化的精神的な 現実を無視してイラクに軍事介入 トレーダーは バカはしないだろう という前提の規制を 設けていました 30年間 教育改革を取材してきました 改革とは役所仕事の整理のことです 許可制度 私立学校 証明書などなど 何年にも渡って結果は散々です 私たちは好きな人から学びます 先生と生徒のつながりに 触れていなければ 現実的な 話をしていません こうした現実は政策を作る 段階で消えてなくなります

一つの疑問は 人情味溢れる人たちが 政策を作る 段階に入ると なぜ 人間味がなくなるのか? 私の結論はもっと 大きな問題のサインでした 長年 人間の本質を捉えるとき 理性と感情という 二つの領域が存在し これらは切り離されていると考えられ 社会は感情を抑制することで 発展してきたと考えられてきました 本質的に人間は理性的で 目標に対し 一直線に 向かうものだと考えています 人間の行動を測る時 物理学の世界と同じような 前提を持ち出します こうして人間の本質の大前提が とても浅はかになりました

物質的なことはよく話せますが 感情についてはまるっきりダメ スキルや安全 健康については話せますが 人の性格については まるっきりダメです アラスデア・マッキンタイア曰く 「古代の倫理観や美徳 名誉や美点について 知ってはいるが もはや それらと自分たちを結びつける 手立てを失ってしまった」 浅はかな政策をとるようになり 人間の営み全体までも浅はかなものになりました

子育てでも明らかです 午後3時に小学校に行くと重そうなバックパックを 背負った子供たちが 飛び出してきます 風が吹けばまるで カブトムシが地面で踏ん張ってるよう お迎えの車はサーブか アウディ はたまたボルボです ある地域では高級車を乗りまわしてもOKですから そのメーカーがアメリカの外交政策に反対してれば まあいいでしょう お迎えはスーパーママです キャリアで成功を収めた人たちで 子供をハーバードへ進学させようとしています スーパーママは一目瞭然 だって子供よりも軽いんですから (笑) 妊娠してからすぐに おしりの運動をして 赤ちゃんが生まれたとたん 中国語のお勉強をはじめます

放課後は子供を啓蒙するため 独自の外交政策の ベン & ジェリーアイスクリームへ このアイス屋が 非暴力主義の歯磨き粉で大ヒット間違いなし バイ菌を殺さず ただ どっかにいってもらうってね

(笑) ホールフーズで粉ミルクのお買い物 ここは進んだ食料品店で 従業員はまるで人権団体の職員みたい (笑) 海藻のお菓子を買います 「ケール入りべジー・ブーティー」 子供たちは言います 「ママ 大腸ガンに効くあのお菓子が食べたいよう」 (笑)

子供はそんな風に育てられ 測れる程度の成功を次々と収めます テスト準備 オーボエ サッカーの練習 一流大学に入り 一流企業に就職して 何人かは上っ面での成功を 収めてがっぽり稼ぐ そんな彼らを時々 リゾート地で見かけます エレガントでスレンダー 太ももなんてないんです ふくらはぎの上にふくらはぎがのってるだけ (笑) 親になり 美人と結婚して遺伝の奇跡を成し遂げます おばあちゃんはガートルード・スタインで 娘はまるでハル・ベリー ホントどうなってるんでしょう? そうこうしているうちに でっかい犬を飼うのが流行なので 70kgのまるで恐竜みたいな ワンちゃんを飼います 名前はジェーン・オースティンのキャラから

歳をとっても人生の哲学もなく 「こんなに多くのことで成功したんだから このまま死ぬわけにはいかない」 パーソナルトレーナーを雇い 精力剤をガボガボ飲む 雪山で見かけるでしょ 厳しい表情で山を せっせと登る彼らを あれじゃ ディック・チェイニーも顔負け

(笑) 彼らが横を通り過ぎる時 その様子はまるで 鉄のレーズン (笑)

とある人生をご紹介しました でも人生はこれだけじゃありません 過去数年にわたってより深く 人間の本質 私たちは一体何者なのか? についてヒントを得てきました 神学や哲学からではなく 心についての研究から 神経科学 認知科学 行動経済学 心理学 社会学 さまざまな分野にわたる リサーチは 意識革命をおこしてきました これらを統合したとき 新しい人間の本質が見えてきます 人間味があり 真新しく魅力的な 新しいヒューマニズム リサーチを統合するときに 3つの洞察がキーとなります

最初の洞察は 人間のほとんどの行動は無意識が 導いているということです こういう言い方もできます 心は莫大な情報を一瞬で受け止めますが 意識できるのはわずかです その結果 おかしなことがおこります デニスという名前の人は なぜかデンティスト(歯医者)になりがち ローレンスはローヤー(弁護士)に 無意識に似ている音に 引き寄せられてるのです なので 私の娘は「合衆国大統領ブルックス」 (笑) もう一つの発見は無意識というのは バカで本能的なものではなく 実際はかなり賢い 家具の購入は本当に決断が要ります 自宅にぴったりのソファ選びは難しい こうするといいです 家具をよく見て 心に留め 一度気分転換をします 数日後 直感で決めてしまうのです 無意識がはたらきます

二つ目の洞察は 思考の中心に感情があるということです 感情を司る脳の部分に 障害がある人が天才ということは まずありません お手上げ状態の場合もあります この分野の大御所である アントニオ・ダマジオが会場にいます 彼が紹介するのは感情は 理由付けから切り離されたものではなく 理由付けのベースとなるということです 感情こそが何が大事かを決めるのです 自身の感情を読み そして 育てていくことが 知識活動の核となります

私は中年で感情について あまり得意でありません お気に入りの話に中年男性のグループが 脳のスキャン装置にかけられる話があります ホントかウソかは知りませんが まずホラー映画を見せられたあと 奥さんへの感情を話させます スキャン結果はどちらも同じでした ホントどちらも恐ろしい 私が感情について話すのは ガンジーが大食いについて 話すのと同じです とにかく感情が 私たちの思考の中心です 心に刻むべきものを決定します 脳は感情の記録装置なのです

三番目の洞察は 人間は元来 自己完結した存在ではなく 社会的動物で合理的ではありません 私たちの存在は人間関係から 浮き彫りになりお互いに深くつながっています 他の人を見るとき 心の中で その人の心を 再現しているのです カーチェイスのシーンを見ると カーチェイスをしているような気になり ポルノを見てると セックスしているような 気になります 同様に恋人たちを見るとき エジプトの暴徒を見るとき 感情は伝染していくのです こうした人間の本質を 語る上での画期的な見解は 政治を そしてより重要な人間の 資質への違った捉え方を 与えてくれます

私たちはフランス式啓蒙の申し子です 理屈至上主義ともいえます しかし このリサーチにより デビッド・ヒュームやアダム・スミスのイギリス式啓蒙の方が 私たちの本質について より的を得ているといえるでしょう 理性はたびたび頼りにならない一方 感情は揺るぎなく しばしば正しい この研究により私たちの文化にある バイアスを矯正し 人生を成功させる上での 大事なことを 与えてくれます 人間の資質を語る時 簡単に測れるモノサシを使いがちです 例えばSATや学位 勉強してきた年数など しかし有意義な人生を送るために必要なことは もっと深くそして それを表す言葉がないようなものです それではいくつかリサーチでの 発見を紹介していきましょう

まずは読心術です 人の心を読み そこにあるものを 吸収する能力 赤ちゃんは 生まれながら持っています ワシントン大学のメルツォフの発見は 生まれたばかりの赤ちゃんに しゃべりかけると赤ちゃんも しゃべり返すというものです 生まれながら おかあさんの心を読み この世をどう読み解くかを 取り入れる力があります アメリカでは55%の赤ちゃんが おかあさんと会話をし 他の人との関わり合い方を学ぶと言われています この学習をした人は人生において とても 幸先の良いスタートを切っています ミネソタ大学の研究によると 月齢18ヶ月の段階で 母子の絆をベースにして どの子が高校を卒業できるかが 77%の確率で予測できるそうです 愛着の絆をもてなかった20%は 他の人と回避的な関係を持ちます 人間関係でトラブルを抱え ジグザグに進むヨットのように 人生をおくります 親密な関係を望む一方 どうしたらいいかわからない これは他者から知識を 吸収するスキルです

次はバランス感覚です 心の中のバイアスや 欠点を認識し 平静を保つ能力です 私たちは自信過剰です 95%の大学教授が平均より 優れていると思い 96%パーセントの大学生が自分は 社交性に優れていると思っています タイムの調査で「あなたはトップ1%の稼ぎ手ですか?」 19%が「そうだ」との回答 (笑) この特徴は男女差があります 男性は女性よりも溺れる可能性が高い 自分の能力を過信しがちだからです 一方 自分のバイアスや過信を認識する 能力を備えている人もいます つつましさを備え 不確かなことに直面しても柔軟に対応します 根拠の程度にあわせた 結論を導くことができ 好奇心旺盛です これは通常IQとは関係ありません

次の能力はメデス ストリート・スマートのことです 物理的な環境への感度 ある環境下での重要なポイントを 見つける能力です イラクに従軍する 兵士についての記事によると 彼らは通りを見渡し なぜか爆発物や 地雷があるか分かるといいます どうしてかは本人も分からない ある種のヒヤリとする感じを受け それは正しいことが多い 次は協働です 集団の中で働く能力です 集団は個人より賢いため とても役に立つ能力です さらにグループの能力は 遠隔より対面のときに より発揮されます コミュニケーションの大部分は言葉ではないからです 効率性は 集団のIQにより 決定されるものではありません コミュニケーションの方法や会話の中で どれだけ順番がまわってくるか によります

次に融合の能力についてです 子供なら「僕はトラだぞっ」と言えます 子供じみていますが 「自分」と「トラ」という コンセプトを結びつけるのは 非常に複雑です これがイノベーションにつながります ピカソがやってのけたのは 西洋の芸術とアフリカの仮面を 概念のレベルで 融合させたことです それは単に 物理的な配置の 問題でなく精神が伴います これらのスキルも 測ることはできません

最後に触れておきたいのは いわゆる一体感です これは能力ではありません 意欲や原動力です 意識レベルでは富や名声を求めますが 無意識レベルで求めるのは 肉体を超越した感覚です 体の感覚がなくなり モノゴトに没頭する状態です 工芸家が自分の作品に没頭したり 自然学者が自然と一体感を感じたり 信者が神と一体化を感じたり それこそが無意識が求めていることなのです 私たちは恋愛時に この一体感を感じます

このリサーチの中で出会った 精神の一体化についての 最もすばらしい話は インディアナ大学の ダグラス・ホスフタッターのものです 彼はキャロルと結婚し ステキな結婚生活を送っていました ところが子供たちが5歳と2歳の時 彼女は脳卒中を起こし 突然この世を去りました ホスフタッターの著書 「奇妙なループの私」では 彼女がこの世を去って数ヶ月後の ある瞬間について触れています ベッドルームにある 彼女の写真をふと見たとき…

本文を引用します 「彼女の顔を じっと見つめた時 彼女の中にいる自分を感じました 私は涙を流しながら 気づいたのです キャロルは僕なんだ 彼女の生前に 共有していた多くの思い 高いレベルで僕たちの 魂が一体化すること 僕たちの魂は子供の将来への 希望と夢を共有していたこと これらの希望はバラバラでも 異なるものではなく お互いがお互いであると示す たった一つのものであり 僕たちを一体化させるもので 結婚し子供ができるまで 想像すらできなかったものでした キャロルはあの世へ旅立ちましたが 彼女の精神は決して滅んでおらず 私の中にハッキリと息づいている」

「苦しみの末 英知を授かる」といいます 彼は苦しみの末 いかに私たちが 深く繋っているかを理解したのです 長年にわたる政策の失敗で 私たちは気づきはじめています 人間の本質への見解がいかに浅はかだったかを 今 その浅はかさと人間の本質を 見誤ったことによる 問題に直面しています こうして意識革新へとつながります 多分野で多くの人が 人間の本質を探り すばらしい新しい人間主義を 追求しています フロイトが無意識の概念を発見した時 当時の考え方に多大な影響を与えました 今 無意識 そして 深層心理について より正確に探ろうとしています それは 私たちの文化にすばらしく 深みのある 人間的な影響を及ぼすでしょう

ありがとう

(拍手)

― もっと見る ―
― 折りたたむ ―

品詞分類

  • 主語
  • 動詞
  • 助動詞
  • 準動詞
  • 関係詞等

関連動画