How do you know whom to trust Ram Neta

Transcriber: Andrea McDonough
Reviewer: Bedirhan Cinar

You believe that the Sun is much larger than the Earth,

that the Earth is a roughly spherical planet

that rotates on its axis every 24 hours

and it revolves around the Sun once every 365 days.

You believe that you were born on a particular date,

that you were born to two human parents

and that each of your human parents

was born on an earlier date.

You believe that other human beings

have thoughts and feelings like you do

and that you are not surrounded by humanoid robots.

You believe all of these things and many more,

not on the basis of direct observation,

which can’t, by itself, tell you very much

about the relative size and motion

of the Sun and the Earth,

or about your own family history,

or about what goes on in the minds of other humans.

Instead, these beliefs are mostly based on

what you’ve been told.

Without spoken and written testimonies,

human beings could not pass on knowledge

from one person to another,

let alone from one generation to another.

We would know much, much less

about the world around us.

So learning about a topic

by asking an expert on that topic,

or appealing to authority,

helps us gain knowledge,

but, it doesn’t always.

Even the most highly respected authorities

can turn out to be wrong.

Occasionally this happens

because a highly respected authority is dishonest

and claims to know something

that she or he really doesn’t know.

Sometimes it happens just because they make a mistake.

They think they know when they don’t know.

For example, a number of respected economists

did not expect the financial collapse of 2008.

They turned out to be wrong.

Maybe they were wrong

because they were overlooking some important evidence.

Maybe they were wrong because they were misinterpreting

some of the evidence they had noticed.

Or maybe they were wrong

simply because they were reasoning carelessly

from the total body of their evidence.

But whatever the reason,

they turned out to be wrong

and many people who trusted their authority

ended up losing lots of money,

losing lots of other people’s money,

on account of that misplaced trust.

So while appealing to authority

can sometimes provide us with valuable knowledge,

it also can sometimes be the cause

of monumental errors.

It’s important to all of us to be able to distinguish

those occasions on which we can safely and reasonably trust authority

from those occasions on which we can’t.

But how do we do that?

In order to do that,

nothing is more useful than

an authority’s track record on a particular topic.

If someone turns out to perform well

in a given situation much of the time,

then it’s likely that he or she will continue

to perform well in that same situation,

at least in the near term.

And this generalization holds true

of the testimony of authorities as much as of anything else.

If someone can consistently pick winners

in both politics and baseball,

then we should probably trust him or her

to keep on picking winners in both politics or baseball,

though maybe not in other things

where his or her track record may be less stellar.

If other forecasters have a poorer track record

on those same two topics,

then we shouldn’t trust them as much.

So whenever you’re considering whether

to trust the testimony of some authority,

the first question to ask yourself is,

“What’s their track record on this topic?”

And notice that you can apply

the very same lesson to yourself.

Your instincts tell you that you’ve just met Mr. Right,

but what sort of track record do your instincts have

on topics like this one?

Have your instincts proven themselves

to be worthy of your trust?

Just as we judge other people’s testimony

by their track record,

so, too, we can judge our own instincts

by their track record.

And this brings us one step closer

to an objective view of ourselves

and our relation to the world around us.

抄写员:Andrea McDonough
审稿人:Bedirhan Cinar

您认为太阳比地球大得多

,地球是一个大致呈球形的行星

,每 24 小时绕其轴自转

一次,并且每 365 天绕太阳公转一次。

你相信你出生在一个特定的日期

,你是由两个人类父母所生,并且你

的每个人类父母

都出生在更早的日期。

你相信其他人也

有和你一样的想法和感受

,并且你没有被人形机器人包围。

你相信所有这些以及更多的事情,

不是基于直接观察

,它本身不能告诉你很多

关于太阳和地球的相对大小和运动

或者你自己的家族历史,

或者关于其他人的想法。

相反,这些信念主要是基于

你被告知的。

没有口头和书面的见证,

人类无法将知识

从一个人传给另一个人,

更不用说从一代传给另一代人了。

我们对周围的世界了解得更多,更少

因此,

通过询问某个主题的专家

或求助于权威来了解某个主题,

可以帮助我们获得知识

,但并非总是如此。

即使是最受尊敬的权威

也可能被证明是错误的。

偶尔会发生这种情况,

因为一个备受尊敬的权威不诚实

并声称

知道她或他真的不知道的事情。

有时它发生只是因为他们犯了一个错误。

当他们不知道时,他们认为他们知道。

例如,一些受人尊敬的经济学家

并没有预料到 2008 年的金融崩溃。

结果他们错了。

也许他们错了,

因为他们忽略了一些重要的证据。

也许他们错了,因为他们误解

了他们注意到的一些证据。

或者他们错了,

仅仅是因为他们

从全部证据中粗心地推理。

但不管是什么原因,

结果证明他们错了

,许多信任他们的权威的人最终因为错误的信任

而损失了很多钱

,损失了很多其他人的钱

因此,虽然诉诸权威

有时可以为我们提供宝贵的知识,

但有时也可能

导致重大错误。

对我们所有人来说,重要的是能够区分

那些我们可以安全合理地信任权威的场合和那些我们不能信任的

场合。

但是我们该怎么做呢?

为了做到这一点,

没有什么

比权威机构在特定主题上的跟踪记录更有用的了。

如果某人

在给定的情况下大部分时间表现良好,

那么他或她很可能会

在相同的情况下继续表现良好,

至少在短期内是这样。

这种概括适用

于权威的证词,也适用于其他任何事情。

如果有人能够始终如一地挑选

政治和棒球的获胜者,

那么我们可能应该相信他或她

会继续挑选政治或棒球的获胜者,

尽管可能不会在

他或她的记录可能不那么出色的其他事情上。

如果其他预测

者在这两个主题上的记录较差,

那么我们就不应该那么信任他们。

因此,每当您考虑

是否相信某个权威的证词时

,首先要问自己的问题是:

“他们在这个话题上的记录如何?”

请注意,您可以

将同样的课程应用到自己身上。

你的直觉告诉你你刚刚认识了Mr. Right,

但是你的直觉对这样的话题有什么样的记录

呢?

你的直觉证明

自己值得你信任吗?

正如我们

根据他们的记录来判断别人的证词

一样,我们也可以

根据他们的记录来判断我们自己的直觉。

这使我们更

接近客观地看待自己

以及我们与周围世界的关系。