Do You Really Believe What You Believe?
你真的相信你所相信的吗？
Every now and then, I’ll do something that’s particularly unwise. I’ll hop on Twitter, and check out what’s going on in the world of politics.
时不时，我会做一些特别不明智的事情。我会登录推特，看看政治界发生了什么。
I’m still not sure why I occasionally venture out there, as I’m 100% convinced that paying attention to politics leads to unclear thinking. Perhaps it’s my little way of going on a thrilling, irrational adventure no one asked for, or maybe it’s just the intellectual version of picking at a scab – you know you shouldn’t do it, it hurts when you actually do do it, but you find yourself doing it anyway.
我仍然不确定为什么我偶尔会冒险去那里，因为我百分之百相信关注政治会导致思维不清。也许这是我以一种刺激的、非理性的冒险方式，没人要求我这样做，或者这只是剥去伤口的智力版——你知道你不应该这样做，实际上 做 这样会很痛，但你还是发现自己在这样做。
Needless to say, every time I venture out into this realm, I come across all sorts of weird human behaviors – behaviors that prove the existence of an alternate dimension that’s been made possible by the internet.
不必说，每次我走进这个领域，我都会遇到各种奇怪的人类行为——这些行为证明了一个因互联网而存在的另一个维度。
I see people saying things that they’d never say to others in real life…
我看到有人说一些他们在现实生活中绝对不会对别人说的话……
…people making ridiculous claims, which are further amplified by others…
…人们提出荒谬的主张，这些主张又被其他人进一步放大…
…and of course, let’s not forget about the wonderful things politicians say.
…当然，我们也不要忘记政治家们说的那些精彩的话。
More often than not, when I come across a controversial clip of some politician talking, the sentences coming out of his or her mouth appear nonsensical and outlandish. It doesn’t matter what color tie the politician is wearing, or what topic is being discussed. There is an interesting blend of confidence and closed-mindedness constructing this person’s position, and I find myself wondering the same thing whenever I watch one of these clips:
我经常发现，当我看到某位政治家发表争议性言论的视频时，他们口中说出的句子似乎毫无意义且荒谬。无论这位政治家穿着什么颜色的领带，或者讨论的是什么话题，这种情况都不会改变。构成这个人立场的是一种自信与狭隘的有趣结合，每当我观看这些视频时，我都会想同样的事情：
Sadly, this question is all-too-common, but an all-too-important one to consider.
遗憾的是，这个问题非常普遍，但却是一个非常重要的问题需要考虑。
We live in an era where every person with an internet connection has a voice, and the volume of that voice can be amplified at any moment. What is spoken or stated is the only way to gauge someone’s stance on an issue, but it’s impossible to know what the person really thinks about it. Are the individual’s words a true representation of his beliefs, or are they merely a signal being used to direct people to a personally useful, but knowingly false position?
我们生活在一个每个有互联网连接的人都有声音的时代，而这个声音的音量可以在任何时刻被放大。所说的话或陈述是衡量一个人在某个问题上立场的唯一方式，但我们无法知道这个人真正对此的想法。个人的话是否真实代表了他的信仰，还是仅仅是一个信号，用来引导人们到一个对他个人有用但明知是错误的立场？
We can’t worm our way into the heads of people to get a concrete answer, but we can try to model this out to get closer to what’s really going on.
我们无法钻进人们的脑海中获取具体答案，但我们可以尝试建模，以更接近真实情况。
Let’s take the case of the heated politician, who claimed that the United States’ economy will crumble in mere days if his fiscal policy doesn’t pass.
让我们以那位激动的政治家为例，他声称如果他的财政政策不通过，美国的经济将在短短几天内崩溃。
We will illustrate this belief with this green stone:
我们将用这块绿色石头来说明这个信念：
We want to determine if the politician really does believe this, and will go through some methods of belief-testing to see if this is the case. Most of the time, however, all we have are his words, which are supposed to reflect and connect with his belief.
我们想要确定这位政治家是否真的相信这一点，并将通过一些信念测试的方法来看看是否如此。然而，大多数时候，我们所拥有的只是他的话，这些话应该反映并与他的信念相连接。
Words are a crude representation of someone’s thoughts, and there’s really just one way to test if they accurately depict a belief. This is done largely through the tool of questioning (made popular by Socrates), which forces the individual to articulate his or her position in a way that aligns with the stated belief.
语言是某人思想的粗略表现，实际上只有一种方法可以测试它们是否准确地描绘了一个信念。这主要通过提问的工具来实现（由苏格拉底推广），这迫使个人以与所述信念一致的方式阐明他或她的立场。
In the case of our politician, we can ask him why he believes that the economy will crumble if his policy isn’t passed, and how he gathered the evidence behind the claim. In an exceptionally rare case, the politician may pause while answering a question, and simply admit that he doesn’t really believe what he said. If this happens, then the case is closed; the belief doesn’t hold.
在我们这位政治家的情况下，我们可以问他为什么相信如果他的政策没有通过，经济会崩溃，以及他是如何收集支持这一说法的证据的。在一个极其罕见的情况下，政治家在回答问题时可能会停顿，坦率承认他并不真正相信自己所说的话。如果发生这种情况，那么案件就结束了；这个信念不成立。
However, both you and I know that this isn’t going to happen.
然而，你我都知道这不会发生。
Words are cheap yet defensible; they’re uttered at no cost, but hold immense power. It’s effortless to tell a lie, but devastating to reveal that you are a liar. Sadly, the incentives are such that it’s rational to defend your position with words, given their ease of use and weight they hold. So we need a better mechanism to test belief that has a higher price of admission.
言语廉价却可辩护；它们的表达没有成本，但却蕴含着巨大的力量。说谎是轻而易举的，但揭示自己是个骗子却是毁灭性的。可悲的是，激励机制使得用言辞捍卫自己的立场是理性的，因为言语的使用简单且分量沉重。因此，我们需要一个更好的机制来检验信念，这个机制的入场费用更高。
This is where one’s actions come into the picture.
这就是一个人行动开始显现的地方。
Actions are the higher resolution images of belief. They provide a more detailed look into one’s belief systems because they require investments of energy, resources, and time, making them much better indicators of truth than words. The incentives are aligned because your reputation and personal gains are attached to what you do, and what you do is expected to be linked to what you believe.
行动是信念的高分辨率图像。它们提供了对一个人信念系统的更详细观察，因为它们需要投入精力、资源和时间，使其成为比言语更好的真相指标。激励是对齐的，因为你的声誉和个人利益与所做的事情相关，而你所做的事情被期望与所信仰的内容相联系。
This expectation, however, cannot simply be assumed. It must be rigorously tested, just like words are tested with questions. And the only way to validate one’s actions is through the tool of observation.
然而，这种期望不能仅仅被假定。它必须经过严格的测试，就像用问题来测试词语一样。验证一个人行为的唯一方法是通过观察这一工具。
Observing one’s patterns of behavior is an effective way to see if their stated beliefs hold. In politics, this is why good journalism is so important. The public only sees and hears what the politician says, but since talk is cheap, it’s an unreliable window into the politician’s actual thoughts. What journalists do is observe the politician’s actions – from who they are in touch with to what type of financial dealings they’re a part of – and convey a better understanding of the politician’s true belief systems to the public.
观察一个人的行为模式是检验其所言信念是否成立的有效方法。在政治中，这就是为什么优秀的新闻报道如此重要。公众只能看到和听到政治家所说的话，但由于言辞便宜，这并不是了解政治家真实想法的可靠途径。记者所做的就是观察政治家的行为——从他们与谁保持联系到他们参与的财务交易类型——并向公众传达对政治家真实信念体系的更好理解。
For example, if journalists discovered that our “economy-will-be-ruined-in-a-matter-of-days” politician was aggressively shorting the market,1 that may suggest a deceptive motive for his fear-mongering. It’s not that he actually believes that the economy will collapse in a few days, he just has a lot to gain if others believed that it did.
例如，如果记者发现我们的“经济将在几天内崩溃”的政治家正在积极做空市场，1 这可能暗示他制造恐慌的动机不诚实。他并不真的相信经济会在几天内崩溃，只是如果其他人相信它会崩溃，他将获得很多利益。
Of course, the link between action and belief extends well beyond politics, and into all facets of everyday life. It’s one of the most reliable ways to determine who we keep as friends, who we do business with, and who we choose to read or listen to. Whether we realize it or not, we are in a perpetual state of observation, fine-tuning our intuitions so they better reflect who is trustworthy, and who is to be avoided.
当然，行动与信念之间的联系远远超出了政治，延伸到日常生活的各个方面。这是我们判断与谁交朋友、与谁做生意以及选择阅读或倾听谁的最可靠方式之一。无论我们是否意识到，我们都处于一种持续的观察状态，不断调整我们的直觉，以更好地反映谁是值得信赖的，谁是应该避免的。
Evaluating one’s words and actions get us close to what one truly believes, but it’s unclear if this completes the picture.
评估一个人的言语和行为可以让我们接近他们真正的信念，但这是否能完整呈现全貌尚不明确。
Let’s say our politician ardently sticks to his claim, both in what he says and what he does. All that is well, but…
假设我们的政治家在言行上都坚定地坚持自己的主张。这很好，但……
…it’s just hard to deny that there’s still something really off about his belief. How can he really believe that the U.S. economy – an incomprehensibly massive engine of systems and behaviors – will be wiped out if his little policy proposal isn’t passed? How can he possibly think that he would have that much influence? Does he even realize how implausible this sounds to others?
…很难否认，他的信念中仍然有一些真的 不对劲。他怎么能真的相信，如果他的政策提案没有通过，美国经济——一个难以理解的庞大系统和行为引擎——就会被摧毁呢？他怎么可能认为自己会有那么大的影响力？他是否意识到这对其他人来说听起来有多么不可信？
This is where the most interesting part of belief comes in. The politician may speak, act, and even think in a way that’s fully aligned with his claim, but he can actually do this while simultaneously knowing that the belief is false. In other words, it’s possible that the politician knows the claim is not true, but he thinks that he is supposed to believe it regardless.
这就是信仰中最有趣的部分。政治家可能会以完全符合他主张的方式说话、行动，甚至思考，但他实际上可以在同时知道这个信仰是错误的情况下做到这一点。换句话说，政治家可能知道这个主张不是真的，但他认为自己是应该相信它的。
This feeling of believing that you should believe something – despite realizing its falsity – is what philosopher Daniel Dennett calls “belief in belief.” It’s a shield that can be used to protect a belief from further scrutiny, as it prioritizes the benefits of a belief over the truth of it.
这种相信你 应该 相信某件事的感觉——尽管意识到它的虚假——是哲学家丹尼尔·丹尼特所称的 “信仰信仰。” 这是一种可以用来保护信仰不受进一步审视的盾牌，因为它将信仰的好处置于真相之上。
This can all sound a bit abstract, so let’s go concrete for a moment, using an example that is sure to be void of any controversy.
这听起来可能有点抽象，所以让我们具体一点，举一个肯定没有争议的例子。
Let’s all say hi to Tom.
大家一起向汤姆打个招呼。
Tom is a man that believes in God.
汤姆是一个相信上帝的人。
Tom says that he believes in God every time someone asks him about it, so his words are aligned with his belief.
汤姆说，每当有人问他关于这个问题时，他都相信上帝，所以他的话与他的信仰是一致的。
Additionally, he goes to church every Sunday with his wife and kids, tithes 10% of his income, sings all the praise songs, prays before every meal, and attends bible studies every other week.2 His actions seem to align with his belief in God as well.
此外，他每个星期天都和妻子和孩子一起去教堂，奉献 10%的收入，唱所有的赞美歌，餐前祷告，并且每两周参加一次圣经学习。2 他的行为似乎与他对上帝的信仰相一致。
It appears that Tom has satisfied the necessary conditions for belief, but the tools of questioning and observation can only be validated externally (from an outsider’s perspective). So what is going on with Tom internally, or more specifically, what are his own thoughts about his belief in God?
看起来汤姆满足了信仰的必要条件，但质疑和观察的工具只能从外部（外部观察者的角度）进行验证。那么汤姆 内部 发生了什么，或者更具体地说，他对自己信仰上帝的想法是什么？
Well, it turns out that Tom has been wrestling with that a lot lately. He’s a big proponent of science, loves reading philosophy, and has questioned many of the things that his religion embodies. He thinks that evolution is the real nature of our species, and that creationism is a myth. He also doesn’t quite understand how an all-compassionate God could bring about so much evil in the world,3 which has made him doubt God’s very existence as well.
好吧，事实证明，汤姆最近一直在为此苦恼。他是科学的坚定支持者，喜欢阅读哲学，并质疑他宗教所体现的许多事物。他认为进化是我们物种的真实本质，而创造论则是一个神话。他也不太理解一个全然仁慈的上帝如何能在世界上带来如此多的邪恶，3这也让他怀疑上帝的存在。
Despite these serious doubts, however, Tom believes that he should live as if he believed in God’s existence. Even though he questions it, he thinks that it is a virtuous, proper, and beneficial thing to carry onward anyway. After all, it’ll be good for his children to go to church, be a part of a community, and have the opportunity to be around good people. He tells himself that it doesn’t really matter if he actually believes in God, it just matters that he believes the belief is true.
尽管有这些严重的怀疑，汤姆仍然相信他应该活得就像他相信上帝的存在一样。尽管他对此有疑问，但他认为继续这样做是一件有德行、合适且有益的事情。毕竟，让他的孩子们去教堂、成为社区的一部分，并有机会接触好人，对他们来说是有好处的。他告诉自己，实际上他是否相信上帝并不重要，重要的是他相信这种信仰是真实的。
From the LessWrong blog:
来自LessWrong 博客：
As Daniel Dennett observes, where it is difficult to believe a thing, it is often much easier to believe that you ought to believe it.
正如丹尼尔·丹尼特所观察到的，当一件事情难以令人信服时，往往更容易相信你应该相信它。
This type of self-convincing behavior in the face of contradictory truth is what is meant by “belief in belief.” It is a powerful force that evades rationality, and it extends well beyond religion.
这种在面对矛盾真相时自我说服的行为被称为“信仰信仰”。这是一种强大的力量，逃避理性，远远超出宗教的范畴。
For our wonderful politician, he probably doesn’t really think that the economy will crumble in days, but believes that he ought to believe it. Perhaps getting his policy passed means that he’ll finally be accepted as a member of his party’s elite, and that will lead to a better life for him and his family. Maybe he believes that his false message to the people will get them to react swiftly, and that will ultimately be a good thing for the direction of the country. It feels important for him to believe as if his belief were true, because doing so would benefit him greatly.
对于我们出色的政治家来说，他可能并不真的认为经济会在几天内崩溃，但他相信他应该这样相信。也许通过让他的政策获得通过，他最终会被接受为他所在政党的精英成员，这将为他和他的家人带来更好的生活。也许他相信他对人民的虚假信息会促使他们迅速反应，这最终会对国家的方向产生积极影响。对他来说，信仰似乎是真实的感觉很重要，因为这样做将极大地使他受益。
What this confirms is that one’s thoughts are the closest representations of belief we have. Words and actions are mere signals of a belief, but only thoughts reveal true intentions. We can say things we don’t believe, we can do things we don’t believe, but we cannot think things we don’t believe. If you think you can, then you are just doing that “belief in belief” thing, deceiving yourself in the process.
这确认了一个人的思想是我们拥有的最接近信念的表现。言语和行为只是信念的信号，但只有思想才能揭示真实的意图。我们可以说一些我们不相信的话，我们可以做一些我们不相信的事情，但我们无法思考一些我们不相信的事情。如果你认为你可以，那么你只是在做那种“信仰信仰”的事情，在这个过程中欺骗自己。
The problem with thoughts, however, is that we can’t validate what they are in others. This is frustrating, given that we started this post trying to figure out if we could determine if someone really believed what they said. Unfortunately, this is largely a futile exercise – people won’t admit that they believe in belief unless they’re unusually aware of their own lack of honesty.
然而，思想的问题在于我们无法验证他人的思想是什么。这令人沮丧，因为我们开始这篇文章时试图弄清楚是否能判断某人是否真的相信他们所说的话。不幸的是，这在很大程度上是徒劳的——人们不会承认他们相信信念，除非他们对自己缺乏诚实有异常的意识。
So when it comes to others, beliefs can only be tested externally. The belief-testing structure is linear, with the questioning of words on one side, and the observation of actions on the other:
所以当涉及到他人时，信仰只能在外部进行检验。信仰检验的结构是线性的，一边是对言辞的质疑，另一边是对行为的观察：
However, when it comes to ourselves, the structure changes.
然而，当涉及到我们自己时，结构会发生变化。
We have direct access to our thoughts, and we can test our beliefs internally through personal experience and knowledge. We can be honest about whether we really think a belief is true, or if we’re just believing as if it is. And the only way to test this link between our thoughts and belief is through the tool of introspection.
我们可以直接接触我们的思想，并通过个人经验和知识在内部检验我们的信念。我们可以诚实地判断我们是否真的认为某个信念是真实的，或者我们只是像相信它一样去相信。而检验我们思想与信念之间联系的唯一方法就是通过内省这一工具。
This complete model is what I call the Belief Triangle, and is what I use when surveying my views of myself and the world. This framework determines whether or not my words, actions, and thoughts are aligned with what I think I believe. If they are, then this is a belief that represents my honest view of reality.
这个完整的模型是我所称的 信念三角，我在审视自己和世界的观点时使用这个模型。这个框架决定了我的言语、行动和思想是否与我认为我相信的东西一致。如果一致，那么这就是一个代表我对现实诚实看法的信念。
However, if I find that any one of the points aren’t satisfied, the triangle must break. Introspection is the key ingredient to determine if a belief holds, and it must be used frequently.4
然而，如果我发现任何一个要点不满足，三角形就必须破裂。内省是判断信念是否成立的关键成分，必须经常使用。4
We’ve already explored the words and actions areas, but I want to linger on the endpoint of thought for a moment. I find that there are so many parts of our lives where we believe things just because we feel that we ought to believe in them. We go against our own rational judgments all the time, just because the invisible force of obligation lurks in the background.
我们已经探讨了语言和行动的领域，但我想稍微停留在思维的终点。我发现我们生活中有很多地方，我们相信某些事情仅仅因为我们觉得应该相信它们。我们总是违背自己的理性判断，仅仅因为义务的无形力量潜伏在背后。
Here’s a common example. If you hate your job, you may deceive yourself into thinking that the job is okay so that you stay. Of course, you don’t really believe that the job is good for your personal development, but it’s certainly useful to believe that belief so you could carry on. After all, isn’t this what you should believe? Your family and friends (and maybe even yourself) would think you’re crazy if you quit, given the stability the job provides.
这是一个常见的例子。如果你讨厌你的工作，你可能会自欺欺人地认为这份工作还不错，以便你能继续待下去。当然，你并不真的相信这份工作对你的个人发展有好处，但相信这个信念无疑是有用的，这样你才能继续下去。毕竟，这难道不是你 应该 相信的吗？考虑到这份工作提供的稳定性，你的家人和朋友（甚至可能是你自己）会认为你辞职是疯狂的。
So rather than immerse yourself in a side project or find a more stimulating job, you remain in stasis, growing older in mind and body but not in skills or experience. This is how “belief in belief” works: It breaks the connection between your true thoughts and your stated beliefs, which cripples your judgment in the long-run.
所以，与其沉浸在一个副项目中或寻找一个更具刺激性的工作，不如保持静止，心智和身体逐渐变老，却没有技能或经验的增长。这就是“信仰信仰”的运作方式：它切断了你真实想法与你所表述信念之间的联系，从而在长远中削弱了你的判断力。
This disconnect between thought and belief is found everywhere. It’s found in the lawyer that wants to be an entrepreneur, but fears what people will think. It’s found in the scientist that comes across a great observation, but hides it because it contradicts what he’s been saying for years. It’s found in the priest that would rather be a Buddhist, but is afraid of losing everything if he reveals this.
这种思想与信念之间的脱节无处不在。它体现在想成为企业家的律师身上，但又害怕别人的看法。它体现在遇到重大观察的科学家身上，但因为与他多年来的说法相矛盾而选择隐瞒。它体现在宁愿成为佛教徒的牧师身上，但又害怕如果揭示这一点会失去一切。
Often times, the thing that gets in the way of thought and belief is our concern for reputation. Rather than being true to ourselves, we want to fit the image that others expect. This concern clouds our judgment, making us less honest with our real beliefs and muting the inner voice that knows us best. This results in a lot of fickle “I should”s instead of definitive “I am”s, and obscures our ability to be clear thinkers.
往往，妨碍我们思考和信仰的，是我们对声誉的担忧。我们不愿忠于自己，而是想迎合他人期望的形象。这种担忧模糊了我们的判断，使我们对真实的信念变得不那么诚实，压制了最了解我们的内心声音。这导致了许多反复无常的“我应该”而不是明确的“我就是”，并模糊了我们清晰思考的能力。
To remove this fog, it’s important to reflect on the finiteness of existence, and that your beliefs are the only things that will direct your words, actions, and thoughts for this one life you’ll live. They are the maps that will guide you through the rocky terrain, and only you can draw your own.
要消除这种迷雾，重要的是反思存在的有限性，以及你的信念是唯一能引导你在这短暂生命中言语、行动和思想的东西。它们是引导你穿越崎岖地形的地图，只有你能绘制自己的地图。
More often than not, you will draw them in a way that aligns with your view of reality. But sometimes, you might find yourself drawing it in a way that goes against what you know is right.
往往，你会以一种与你对现实的看法相符的方式来描绘它。但有时，你可能会发现自己以一种与你所知道的正确相反的方式来描绘它。
Introspection is about checking yourself in that moment, and revising that misguided route to direct it toward the truth. It’s about being committed to drawing your map to the best of your ability, and not in a way that is convenient and reliant upon the expectations of others.
内省是关于在那个时刻检查自己，并修正错误的方向以引导其走向真理。这是关于致力于尽自己所能绘制你的地图，而不是以方便和依赖他人期望的方式。
Earnestly believing what you believe is not as easy as it sounds, but it’s the only way to live a life that is aligned with everything you say, do, and think. The more Belief Triangles you form with that type of judgment, the more beacons of light you have to guide you toward clarity and wisdom.
真诚地相信你所信仰的并不像听起来那么简单，但这是过上与你所说、所做和所想的一切相一致的生活的唯一方法。你用这种判断形成的信念三角越多，你就拥有越多的光明灯塔，引导你走向清晰和智慧。
So I leave you with this question: Do you really believe what you believe? For a question so simple, the answer is not. It’s a lifelong inquiry into examining who you truly are, so ask this question deeply, and ask it often.
所以我留给你这个问题：你真的相信你所相信的吗？ 对于这样一个简单的问题，答案却并非如此。这是一个终身的探究，审视你真正是谁，所以要深入地问这个问题，并且经常问。
Doing so will reveal more about yourself than you thought you ever knew.
这样做会揭示出比你想象中更多关于你自己的事情。
_______________
If you enjoyed this post, consider joining the More To That newsletter. You’ll be notified when a new post is up, and will get access to personal reflections that you won’t find anywhere else.
如果您喜欢这篇文章，请考虑加入 More To That 通讯。您将会在新文章发布时收到通知，并获得您在其他地方找不到的个人反思。
作为欢迎礼物，我将送你一本 10 页的电子书，名为如何发现伟大的想法，以及一包彩色手机壁纸。
如果你想学习如何写像我上面分享的那篇文章，查看一下 被审视的作家。这是 3 小时的自学材料，旨在提升你的写作实践。
如果您想支持制作这些帖子所花费的许多小时，可以在我的 Patreon 页面这里 进行支持。
_______________
注意：在这篇文章中，我经常使用“诚实”这个词，就像“信仰”一样，它是一个有分量的词。关于我对诚实的看法，有一篇详细的文章，仅在 Patreon 上可用。
For more posts on introspection and self-reflection:
有关内省和自我反思的更多文章：
The Right Side of Thought
思维的右侧
