為什么人文學(xué)科不應(yīng)被摒棄

Starving for Wisdom

為什么人文學(xué)科不應(yīng)被摒棄

“We are drowning in information, while starving for wisdom.”

“世人被知識壓死，智慧卻少得很。”

That epigram from E.O. Wilson captures the dilemma of our era. Yet the solution of some folks is to disdain wisdom.

E·O·威爾遜( E.O. Wilson)一語道破了我們這個時代的困境。但一些人給出的應(yīng)對之道竟是鄙棄智慧。

“Is it a vital interest of the state to have more anthropologists?” Rick Scott, the Florida governor, once asked. A leader of a prominent Internet company once told me that the firm regards admission to Harvard as a useful heuristic of talent, but a college education itself as useless.

“擁有更多人類學(xué)家是本州的關(guān)鍵利益所在嗎?”佛羅里達州州長里克·斯科特(Rick Scott)曾經(jīng)這樣問道。某著名互聯(lián)網(wǎng)公司的負責(zé)人曾經(jīng)告訴我，該公司把哈佛大學(xué)的錄取通知書當成一個人是否有才的具有啟發(fā)性的有用依據(jù)，但并不認為大學(xué)教育本身有什么參考價值。

Parents and students themselves are acting on these principles, retreating from the humanities. Among college graduates in 1971, there were about two business majors for each English major. Now there are seven times as many. (I was a political science major; if I were doing it over, I’d be an economics major with a foot in the humanities.)

學(xué)生和家長們正按照這類準則行事，紛紛摒棄人文學(xué)科。1971年，商科本科畢業(yè)生和英語系本科畢業(yè)生的比例是2：1?，F(xiàn)在，兩者的比例是7：1。(我學(xué)的是政治學(xué)專業(yè);如果可以重來一次，我會去學(xué)經(jīng)濟學(xué)，同時選修人文學(xué)科。)

I’ve been thinking about this after reading Fareed Zakaria’s smart new book, “In Defense of a Liberal Education.” Like Zakaria, I think that the liberal arts teach critical thinking (not to mention nifty words like “heuristic”).

自從讀了法里德·扎卡里亞(Fareed Zakaria)頗有見地的新書《捍衛(wèi)人文教育》(In Defense of a Liberal Education)之后，我一直在思考這一現(xiàn)象。和扎卡里亞一樣，我認為人文教育有助于培養(yǎng)學(xué)生的批判性思維(具有“啟發(fā)性”等漂亮話就更不用說了)。

So, to answer the skeptics, here are my three reasons the humanities enrich our souls and sometimes even our pocketbooks as well.

人文學(xué)科可以豐富我們的精神生活，有時甚至可以充實我們的錢袋子。為了回應(yīng)懷疑論者，我在此給出三點理由。

First, liberal arts equip students with communications and interpersonal skills that are valuable and genuinely rewarded in the labor force, especially when accompanied by technical abilities.

首先，人文教育有助于提高學(xué)生的溝通和人際交往能力，在職場上，這種能力可以給人帶來巨大的回報，尤其是在跟技術(shù)能力共同起作用的時候。

“A broad liberal arts education is a key pathway to success in the 21st-century economy,” says Lawrence Katz, a labor economist at Harvard. Katz says that the economic return to pure technical skills has flattened, and the highest return now goes to those who combine soft skills — excellence at communicating and working with people — with technical skills.

“在21世紀的經(jīng)濟體系中，寬泛的人文教育是通往成功的重要途徑，”哈佛大學(xué)的勞動經(jīng)濟學(xué)家勞倫斯·卡茨(Lawrence Katz)說?？ù姆Q，純技術(shù)能力的經(jīng)濟回報已經(jīng)趨平，既具有軟能力——善于與他人交流和協(xié)同工作——又具有技術(shù)能力的人獲得的回報是最高的。

“So I think a humanities major who also did a lot of computer science, economics, psychology, or other sciences can be quite valuable and have great career flexibility,” Katz said. “But you need both, in my view, to maximize your potential. And an economics major or computer science major or biology or engineering or physics major who takes serious courses in the humanities and history also will be a much more valuable scientist, financial professional, economist, or entrepreneur.”

“因此我認為，一個人文專業(yè)的學(xué)生，如果對計算機科學(xué)、經(jīng)濟學(xué)、心理學(xué)或者其他學(xué)科也頗有研究，就會很有價值，在職場是會有很大的靈活性的。”卡茨說，“但在我看來，你必須‘腳踏兩只船’，才能最大限度地挖掘自己的潛能。一個經(jīng)濟學(xué)專業(yè)的學(xué)生，或者是計算機專業(yè)、生物學(xué)專業(yè)、工程學(xué)專業(yè)、物理學(xué)專業(yè)的學(xué)生，如果正經(jīng)八百地修過人文和歷史課程，也會成為一個更有價值的科學(xué)家、金融專業(yè)人士、經(jīng)濟學(xué)家或者企業(yè)家。 ”

My second reason: We need people conversant with the humanities to help reach wise public policy decisions, even about the sciences. Technology companies must constantly weigh ethical decisions: Where should Facebook set its privacy defaults, and should it tolerate glimpses of nudity? Should Twitter close accounts that seem sympathetic to terrorists? How should Google handle sex and violence, or defamatory articles?

我的第二個理由：我們需要通曉人文學(xué)科的人來幫忙做出明智的公共政策決策——甚至是和科學(xué)有關(guān)的決策?？萍脊颈仨毑粩鄬惱頉Q策進行權(quán)衡：Facebook的默認隱私設(shè)置應(yīng)該是什么樣的，該容忍些許裸體影像的存在嗎?Twitter該關(guān)停似乎對恐怖分子頗為同情的賬號嗎?谷歌 (Google)該如何處理關(guān)于性與暴力的內(nèi)容以及誹謗性文章?

In the policy realm, one of the most important decisions we humans will have to make is whether to allow germline gene modification. This might eliminate certain diseases, ease suffering, make our offspring smarter and more beautiful. But it would also change our species. It would enable the wealthy to concoct superchildren. It’s exhilarating and terrifying.

在政策領(lǐng)域，我們?nèi)祟惐仨氉龀龅囊粋€最為重要的決定：是否允許修正人類生殖細胞基因。人類生殖細胞基因修正或許可以消滅特定種類的疾病，減少痛苦，讓我們的后代更聰明、更美麗。但它同時也會改變我們這個物種，會讓富人有機會炮制出猶如超人的子女。這真是既令人振奮，又透著恐怖。

To weigh these issues, regulators should be informed by first-rate science, but also by first-rate humanism. After all, Homer addressed similar issues three millenniums ago.

要權(quán)衡這類問題，監(jiān)管者不僅要具有一流的科學(xué)素質(zhì)，還要具有一流的人文素質(zhì)。畢竟，早在3000年前，荷馬(Homer)就提出過類似的問題。

In “The Odyssey,” the beautiful nymph Calypso offers immortality to Odysseus if he will stay on her island. After a fling with her, Odysseus ultimately rejects the offer because he misses his wife, Penelope. He turns down godlike immortality to embrace suffering and death that are essential to the human condition.

在《奧德賽》(The Odyssey)中，美麗的仙女卡呂普索(Calypso)向奧德修斯(Odysseus)許諾，只要留在她的島上，他就可以長生不老。跟仙女有了一段風(fēng)流韻事之后，奧德修斯最終拒絕了這個提議，因為他思念自己的妻子佩涅洛佩(Penelope)。他拒絕像神一樣永生，選擇面對人類必須面對的痛苦和死亡。

Likewise, when the President’s Council on Bioethics issued its report in 2002, “Human Cloning and Human Dignity,” it cited scientific journals but also Ernest Hemingway’s “The Old Man and the Sea.” Even science depends upon the humanities to shape judgments about ethics, limits and values.

同樣地，總統(tǒng)生物倫理委員會(President's Council on Bioethics)2002年發(fā)布題為《人的克隆與人類尊嚴》(Human Cloning and Human Dignity)的報告時，既援引了科學(xué)雜志的內(nèi)容，也提到了歐內(nèi)斯特·海明威(Ernest Hemingway)的《老人與?！?The Old Man and the Sea)。即便事關(guān)科學(xué)，在做出涉及倫理、限度和價值等方面的判斷時，也要借助人文學(xué)科。

Third, wherever our careers lie, much of our happiness depends upon our interactions with those around us, and there’s some evidence that literature nurtures a richer emotional intelligence.

第三，不論從事什么職業(yè)，我們的幸福在很大程度上都取決于我們?nèi)绾胃車娜私涣?。有一些證據(jù)表明，涉獵文學(xué)有助于提高情商。

Science magazine published five studies indicating that research subjects who read literary fiction did better at assessing the feelings of a person in a photo than those who read nonfiction or popular fiction. Literature seems to offer lessons in human nature that help us decode the world around us and be better friends.

在《科學(xué)》雜志上發(fā)表過的五項研究表明，比起閱讀非虛構(gòu)類作品或者通俗小說的研究對象，閱讀文藝小說的研究對象能夠更好地評估照片上的人處于何種情緒之中。文學(xué)似乎提供了與人的本質(zhì)有關(guān)的課程，幫助我們解讀周圍的世界，幫助我們更好地與人相處。

Literature also builds bridges of understanding. Toni Morrison has helped all America understand African-American life. Jhumpa Lahiri illuminated immigrant contradictions. Khaled Hosseini opened windows on Afghanistan.

文學(xué)還可以架設(shè)起理解的橋梁。托妮·莫利森(Toni Morrison)幫助整個美國理解非裔美國人的生活。裘帕·拉希里(Jhumpa Lahiri)闡明了移民群體面對的種種矛盾?？ɡ盏?middot;胡賽尼(Khaled Hosseini)打開了觀察阿富汗的窗口。

In short, it makes eminent sense to study coding and statistics today, but also history and literature.

總而言之，在當下這個時代，學(xué)習(xí)編程和統(tǒng)計學(xué)固然意義重大，學(xué)習(xí)歷史和文學(xué)同樣十分重要。