看法決定一切(Ted演講 中文字幕)

what you have here uh is an electronic

cigarette um it's something that since

it was invented a year or two ago has

given me untold

happiness a little bit of it I think is

the nicotine but there's something much

bigger than that which is ever since

in the UK they ban smoking in public

places I've never enjoyed a drinks party

ever

again and the reason I only worked out

just the other day which is when you go

to a drinks party and you stand up and

you hold a glass of red wine and you

talk endlessly to people you don't

actually want to spend all the time

talking it's really really tiring

sometimes you just want to stand there

silently alone with your

thoughts sometimes you just want to

stand in the corner and stare out of the

window

now the problem is when you can't smoke

if you stand and stare out of the window

on your own you're an antisocial

friendless

idiot if you stand and stare out of the

window on your own with a cigarette

you're a

philosopher

and so the power of reframing things

cannot be overstated what we have is

exactly the same thing the same activity

but one of them makes you feel great and

the other one with just a small change

of posture makes you feel

terrible and I think one of the problems

with classical economics is it's

absolutely preoccupied with reality and

reality isn't a particularly good guide

to human

happiness why for example a pensioner

much happier than the young

unemployed both of them after all are in

exactly the same state of life you both

have too much time on your hands and not

much money but pensioners are reportedly

very very happy whereas the unemployed

are extraordinarily unhappy and

depressed the reason I think is that the

pensioners believe they've chosen to be

pensioners whereas the young unemployed

feel it's been thrust upon

them in England the upper middle classes

have actually solved this problem perf

ly because they've rebranded

unemployment if you're an upper middle

class English person you call

unemployment a year

off

um and that's because having a son who's

unemployed in Manchester is really quite

embarrassing but having a son who's

unemployed in Thailand is really viewed

as quite an

accomplishment but actually the power to

Rebrand things to understand that

actually our experiences costs things

don't actually much depend on what they

really are but on how we view them I

genuinely think can't be overstated

there's an experiment I think Daniel

pink refers to where you put two dogs in

a box and the box has an electric

floor every now and then an electric

shock is applied to the floor which

pains the

dogs the only difference is one of the

dogs has a small button in its half of

the box and when it nuzzles the button

the electric shock

stops the other dog doesn't have the

button it's exposed to exactly the same

level of pain as the dog in the first

box but it has no control over the

circumstances generally the first dog

can be relatively content the second dog

lapses into complete

depression the circumstances of Our

Lives May actually matter less to our

happiness than the sense of control we

feel over our lives

it's an interesting

question we ask the question the whole

debate in the western world is about the

level of Taxation but I think there's

another debate to be asked which is the

level of control we have over our tax

money that what cost us £10 in one

context can be a curse what costs us10

in a different context we may actually

welcome you know pay £20,000 in tax uh

towards health and you're merely feeling

a mug pay £20,000 to endow a hospital

Ward and you're called a

philanthropist I'm probably in the wrong

country to talk about willingness to pay

tax

um so

uh I'll give you one in return how you

frame things really matters do you call

it the bailout of Greece or the bailout

of a load of stupid Banks which lent to

Greece because they are actually the

same thing what you call them actually

affects how you react to them viscerally

and morally I think psychological value

is great to be absolutely honest one of

my great friends um a professor called

Nick chater who is the professor of

decision Sciences in London believes

that we should spend far less time

looking into Humanity's hidden depths

and spend much more time exploring the

hidden

shallows I think that's true actually I

think Impressions have an insane effect

on what we think and what we do but what

we don't have is a really good model of

human psychology at least pre caraman

perhaps we didn't have a really good

model of human psychology to put

alongside models of engineering of

neoclassical economics so people who

believed in psychological Solutions

didn't have a model we didn't have a

framework uh this is what Warren

Buffett's business partner Charlie Munga

calls a latis work on which to hang your

ideas Engineers economists classical

economists all had a very very robust

existing latis work on which practically

every idea could be hung we merely had a

collection of random individual insights

without an overall model and what that

means is that in looking at Solutions

we've probably given too much priority

to what I'd call technical engineering

Solutions Newtonian Solutions and not

nearly enough to the psych psychological

ones you know my example of the Eurostar

£6 million pound spent to reduce the

journey time between Paris and London by

about 40 minutes for 0.01 % of this

money you could have put Wi-Fi on the

trains which wouldn't have reduced the

duration of the journey but would have

improved its enjoyment and its

usefulness far

more for maybe 10% of the money you

could have paid all of the world's top

male and female supermodels to walk up

and down the train handing out free

chadow petruse to all the

passengers you'd still have £5 billion

in change and people would ask for the

trains to be slowed

down why were we not given the chance to

solve that problem psychologically I

think it's because there's an imbalance

an asymmetry in the way we treat

creative emotionally driven

psychological ideas versus the way we

treat rational numerical spreadsheet

driven ideas if you're a creative person

I think quite rightly you have to share

all your ideas for approval with people

much more rational than you you have to

go in and you have to have a cost

benefit analysis A feasibility study an

Roi study and so forth

and I think that's probably

right but this does not apply the other

way around people who have an existing

framework an economic framework and

Engineering framework feel that actually

logic is its own answer what they don't

say is well the numbers all seem to add

up but before I present this idea I'll

go and show it to some really crazy

people to see if they can come up with

something better and so we artificially

I think prioritize what I'd call

mechanistic ideas over psychological

ideas an example of a great

psychological idea the single best

Improvement in passenger satisfaction on

the London Underground per pound spent

came when they didn't add any extra

trains nor change the frequency of the

trains they put dot matrix display

boards on the

platforms because the nature of a weight

is not just dependent on its numerical

quality its duration but on the level of

uncertainty you experience during that

weight waiting 7 minutes for a train

with a countdown clock is less

frustrating and irritating than waiting

4 minutes knuckle biting going when's

this train going to damn well arrive

here's a beautiful example of a

psychological solution deployed in Korea

red traffic lights have a countdown

delay it's proven to reduce the accident

rate in experiments why because road

range impatience and general irritation

are massively reduced when you can

actually see the the time you have to

wait in China not really understanding

the principle behind this they appli the

same principle to Green traffic lights

um

which isn't a great idea you're 200

yards away you realize you got 5 Seconds

To Go you floor

it um the Koreans very assiduously did

test both the accident rate goes down

when you apply this to Red traffic

lights it goes up when you apply it to

Green traffic lights this is all I'm

asking for really in human decision-

making is the consideration of these

three things I'm not asking for the

complete Primacy of one over the other

I'm merely saying that when you solve

problem

you should look at all three of these

equally and you should seek as far as

possible to find Solutions which sit in

the sweet spot in the middle if you

actually look at a great business you'll

nearly always see all of these three

things coming into play really really

successful businesses Google is a great

great technological success but it's

also based on a very good psychological

insight people believe something that

only does one thing is better at that

thing than something that does that

thing and something else it's it's an

innate thing called gold dilution alet

Fishback has written a paper about this

everybody else at the time of Google

more or less was trying to be a portal

yes there's a search function but you

also have weather sports scores bits of

news Google understood that if you're

just a search engine people assume

you're a very very good search engine

all of you know this actually from when

you go in to buy a television and in the

shabier end of the row of flat screen

TVs you can see are these rather

despised things called combined TV and

DVD players and we have no knowledge

whatsoever of the quality of those

things but we look at a combined TV and

DVD player and we go g it's probably a

bit of a crap Telly and a bit rubbish as

a DVD player so we walk out of the shops

with one of each Google is as much a

psychological uh success as it is a

technological one I propose that we can

use psychology to solve problems that we

didn't even realize were problems at all

this is my suggestion for getting people

to finish their course of antibiotics

don't give them 24 white pills give them

18 white pills and six blue ones and

tell them to take the white pills first

and then take the blue

ones it's called chunking the likelihood

that people will get to the end is much

greater when there is a milestone

somewhere in the

middle one of the great mistakes I think

of Economics is it fails to understand

that what something is whether it's

retirement unemployment

cost is a function not only of its

amount but also its meaning

this is a toll Crossing in Britain quite

often cues happen at the tolls sometimes

you get very very severe cues you could

apply the same principle actually if

You' like to the security Lanes in

airports what would happen if you could

actually pay twice as much money to

cross the bridge but go through a lane

that's an express lane it's not an

unreasonable thing to do it's an

economically efficient thing to do time

means more to some people and others if

you're waiting trying to get to a job

interview you'd patently pay a couple of

pounds more to go through the the um uh

the fast lane if you're on the way to

visit your mother-in-law you'd probably

prefer you you'd probably prefer to stay

on the left the only problem is if you

introduce this economically efficient

solution people hate it because they

think you're deliberately creating

delays at the bridge in order to

maximize your revenue and why on Earth

should I pay to subsidize your

incompetence on the other hand change

the frame slightly and create charitable

yield management so the extra money you

go goes not to the The Bridge Company it

goes to

charity and the mental willingness to

pay completely

changes you have a relatively

economically efficient solution but one

that actually meets with public approval

and even a small degree of affection

rather than being seen as

bastardy so where economists make the

fundamental mistake is they think that

money is

money actually my pain experienced in

paying 5 is not just proportionate to

the amount but where I think that money

is going and I think understanding that

could revolutionize tax policy it could

revolutionize the Public Services it

could actually change things quite

significantly here's a guy you all need

to study he's an Austrian School

Economist who was first active in the

first half of the 20th century in Vienna

what was interesting about the Austrian

School is they actually grew up

alongside Freud and so they

predominantly interested in Psychology

they believed that um uh there was a

discipline called praxiology which is a

prior discipline to the study of

Economics praxiology is the study of

human Choice action and

decision-making I think they're right I

think the danger we have in today's

world is we have the study of Economics

considers itself to be a prior uh

discipline to the study of human

psychology but as Charlie Munga says if

economics isn't behavioral I don't know

what the hell

is Von

mes interestingly believes economics is

just a subset of psychology I think he

refers to economics as the study of

human praxiology under conditions of

scarcity but Von m is among many other

things I think uses an analogy which is

probably the best justification and

explanation for the value of marketing

the value of perceived value and the

fact that we should actually treat it as

being absolutely equivalent to any other

kind of value we tend all of us even

those of us who work in marketing to

think of value in two ways there's the

real value which is when you make

something in effect atal provider

service and then there's a kind of

dubious value which you create by

changing the way people look at things

Von mes completely rejected this

distinction and he used this following

analogy he said he referred actually to

some strange uh economists called the

French

physiocrats who beli that only true

value was what you extracted from the

land so if you were a Shepherd or a

quarryman or a farmer you created True

Value if however you bought some wool

from the shepherd and charged a premium

for converting it into a hat you weren't

actually creating value you were

exploiting the

shepherd now Von M says that modern

economists make exactly the same mistake

with regard to advertising and marketing

he says if you run a restaurant there is

no healthy distinction to be made

between the value you create by cooking

the food and the value you create by

sweeping the floor one of them creates

perhaps the primary product the thing we

think we're paying for the other one

creates a context within which we can

enjoy and appreciate that product and

the idea that one of them should

actually have priority over the other is

fundamentally wrong try this quick

thought experiment imagine a restaurant

that serves michard food but actually

where the restaurant smells of sewage

and there's human feces on the

floor the best thing you can do there to

create value is not actually to improve

the food still further it's to get rid

of the smell and clean up the

floor and it's vital we understand this

if that seems like a sort of strange

obstru thing in the UK the post

office had a 98% success rate at

delivering first class mail the next day

they decided this wasn't good enough and

they wanted to get it up to

99 the effort to do that almost broke

the

organization if at the same time you'd

gone and asked people what percentage of

first class male arrives the next day

the average answer would have been 50 or

the modal answer would have been 50 to

60% now if your perception's much worse

than your reality what an earth you

doing trying to change the reality

that's like trying to improve the food

in a restaurant that

stinks what do you need to do is first

of all tell people that 98% uh of male

gets there the first the next day first

class male that's pretty good I would

argue in Britain there's a much better

frame of reference which is to tell

people that more first class male

arrives the next day in the UK than in

Germany because generally in Britain if

you want to make us happy about

something just tell us we do it better

than the Germans

um choose your frame of reference and

the perceived value and therefore the

actual value is completely transformed

has to be said actually of the Germans

that um the Germans and the French are

doing a brilliant job of creating a

United Europe uh the only thing they

didn't expect is they're uniting Europe

through a shared mild hatred of the

French and Germans um but but I'm

British that's the way we like it

um what you'll also notice is that in

any case our perception is leaky we

can't tell the difference between the

quality of the food and the environment

in which we consume it all of you will

have seen this phenomenon if you have

your car washed or valeted when you

drive away your car feels as if it

drives

better and the reason for this unless my

car valot mysteriously is changing the

oil and Performing work which I'm not

paying him for and I'm unaware of is

because perception is in any case leaky

analgesics that are branded are more

effective at reducing pain than

analgesics that are not branded I don't

just mean through reported pain

reduction actual measured pain reduction

and so

perception actually is leaky in any case

so if you do something that's

perceptually bad in one respect you can

damage the other thank you very

[Applause]

much