為什麼人文學科不應被摒棄

“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.

“擁有更多人類學家是本州的關鍵利益所在嗎？”佛羅里達州州長裏克·斯科特(Rick Scott)曾經這樣問道。某著名互聯網公司的負責人曾經告訴我，該公司把哈佛大學的錄取通知書當成一個人是否有才的具有啟發性的有用依據，但並不認為大學教育本身有什麼參考價值。

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.)

學生和家長們正按照這類準則行事，紛紛摒棄人文學科。1971年，商科本科畢業生和英語系本科畢業生的比例是2：1。現在，兩者的比例是7：1。（我學的是政治學專業；如果可以重來一次，我會去學經濟學，同時選修人文學科。）

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”).

自從讀了法裏德·扎卡里亞(Fareed Zakaria)頗有見地的新書《捍衞人文教育》(In Defense of a Liberal Education)之後，我一直在思考這一現象。和扎卡里亞一樣，我認為人文教育有助於培養學生的批判性思維（具有“啟發性”等漂亮話就更不用説了）。

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。為了迴應懷疑論者，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，人文教育有助於提高學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，”哈佛大學的勞動經濟學家勞倫斯·卡茨(Lawrence Katz)説。卡茨稱，純技術能力的經濟回報已經趨平，既具有軟能力——善於與他人交流和協同工作——又具有技術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，一個人文專業的學生，如果對計算機科學、經濟學、心理學或者其他學科也頗有研究，就會很有價值，在職場是會有很大的靈活性的。”卡茨説，“但在我看來，你必須‘腳踏兩隻船’，才能最大限度地挖掘自己的潛能。一個經濟學專業的學生，或者是計算機專業、生物學專業、工程學專業、物理學專業的學生，如果正經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家、金融專業人士、經濟學家或者企業家。 ”

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科的人來幫忙做出明智的公共政策決策——甚至是和科學有關的決策。科技公司必須不斷對倫理決策進行權衡：Facebook的默認隱私設置應該是什麼樣的，該容忍些許裸體影像的存在嗎？Twitter該關停似乎對恐怖分子頗為同情的賬號嗎？谷歌(Google)該如何處理關於性與暴力的內容以及誹謗性文章？

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.

在政策領域，我們人類必須做出的一個最為重要的決定：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，讓我們的後代更聰明、更美麗。但它同時也會改變我們這個物種，會讓富人有機會炮製出猶如超人的子女。這真是既令人振奮，又透着恐怖。

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.

要權衡這類問題，監管者不僅要具有一流的科學素質，還要具有一流的人文素質。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。跟仙女有了一段風流韻事之後，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，總統生物倫理委員會(President's Council on Bioethics)2002年發佈題為《人的克隆與人類尊嚴》(Human Cloning and Human Dignity)的報告時，既援引了科學雜誌的內容，也提到了歐內斯特·海明威(Ernest Hemingway)的《老人與海》(The Old Man and the Sea)。即便事關科學，在做出涉及倫理、限度和價值等方面的判斷時，也要藉助人文學科。

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，不論從事什麼職業，我們的幸福在很大程度上都取決於我們如何跟周圍的人交流。有一些證據表明，涉獵文學有助於提高情商。

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》雜誌上發表過的五項研究表明，比起閲讀非虛構類作品或者通俗小説的研究對象，閲讀文藝小説的研究對象能夠更好地評估照片上的人處於何種情緒之中。文學似乎提供了與人的本質有關的課程，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.

文學還可以架設起理解的橋樑。託妮·莫利森(Toni Morrison)幫助整個美國理解非裔美國人的生活。裘帕·拉希裏(Jhumpa Lahiri)闡明瞭移民羣體面對的種種矛盾。卡勒德·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，學習編程和統計學固然意義重大，學習歷史和文學同樣十分重要。

John Adams had it right when he wrote to his wife, Abigail, in 1780: “I must study Politicks and War that my sons may have liberty to study Mathematicks and Philosophy. My sons ought to study Mathematicks and Philosophy, Geography, natural History and Naval Architecture, navigation, Commerce and Agriculture, in order to give their Children a right to study Painting, Poetry, Musick, Architecture, Statuary, Tapestry and Porcelaine.”

1780年，約翰·亞當斯(John Adams)在給妻子的一封信裏寫道：“我必須修習政治學與戰爭學，才能讓我們的後代擁有修習數學和哲學的自由；我們的後代必須修習數學、哲學、地理學、博物學、造船學、航海學、商學及農學，才能讓他們的後代擁有修習繪畫、詩歌、音樂、建築、雕刻、繡織和瓷藝的權利。”這話一點沒錯。