永垂不朽的品質:智識的美德

We all know what makes for good character in soldiers. We've seen the movies about heroes who display courage, loyalty and coolness under fire. But what about somebody who sits in front of a keyboard all day? Is it possible to display and cultivate character if you are just an information age office jockey, alone with a memo or your computer?

我們都知道，對士兵而言，何爲優秀品質的要義。我們看過的一些電影所刻畫的英雄人物，在炮火中表現出了勇氣、忠誠和冷靜。但對一天到晚坐在鍵盤前的人而言，答案又是什麼呢？如果你僅僅是信息時代裏的一個寫字樓職員，成天與備忘錄或電腦相伴，那你還有機會展現和培養自己的品質嗎？

Of course it is. Even if you are alone in your office, you are thinking. Thinking well under a barrage of information may be a different sort of moral challenge than fighting well under a hail of bullets, but it's a character challenge nonetheless.

當然可以。即便是獨自待在辦公室裏，你也在思考。和在槍林彈雨下好好戰鬥相比，面對大量信息時好好思考可能是一種截然不同的道德挑戰，但它仍然不失爲對品性的一種挑戰。

In their 2007 book, "Intellectual Virtues," Robert C. Roberts of Baylor University and W. Jay Wood of Wheaton College list some of the cerebral virtues. We can all grade ourselves on how good we are at each of them.

貝勒大學(Baylor University)的羅伯特·C·羅伯茨(Robert C. Roberts)和威頓學院(Wheaton College)的W·傑伊·伍德(W. Jay Wood)在2007年出版的《智識美德》(Intellectual Virtues)一書中，列出了一些智識上的美德。我們可以逐項給自己打分，看看自己做得怎麼樣。

First, there is love of learning. Some people are just more ardently curious than others, either by cultivation or by nature.

第一條是愛學習。後天養成的也好，天生的也罷，有些人就是比另外一些人具有更強烈的好奇心。

Second, there is courage. The obvious form of intellectual courage is the willingness to hold unpopular views. But the subtler form is knowing how much risk to take in jumping to conclusions. The reckless thinker takes a few pieces of information and leaps to some faraway conspiracy theory. The perfectionist, on the other hand, is unwilling to put anything out there except under ideal conditions for fear that she could be wrong. Intellectual courage is self-regulation, Roberts and Wood argue, knowing when to be daring and when to be cautious. The philosopher Thomas Kuhn pointed out that scientists often simply ignore facts that don't fit with their existing paradigms, but an intellectually courageous person is willing to look at things that are surprisingly hard to look at.

第二條是勇氣。智識的勇氣有一種明顯的表現形式，即樂於持有不受歡迎的觀點。但它還有一種更微妙的表現形式，那就是知道急於下結論會帶來多大的風險。莽撞的思考者會擷取少量信息，迅速推導出虛無縹緲的陰謀論。完美主義者則與此相反，如果條件不完備，她是不願意下任何定論的，因爲擔心自己可能出錯。羅伯茨和伍德說，智識的勇氣是一種自律，知道在什麼時候該大膽、在什麼時候該謹慎。哲學家托馬斯·庫恩曾指出，科學家們常常簡單粗暴地忽略掉跟既有範式不相符的事實；但一個人如果具有智識的勇氣，會樂於去研究那些異常難於接受的事情。

Third, there is firmness. You don't want to be a person who surrenders his beliefs at the slightest whiff of opposition. On the other hand, you don't want to hold dogmatically to a belief against all evidence. The median point between flaccidity and rigidity is the virtue of firmness. The firm believer can build a steady worldview on solid timbers but still delight in new information. She can gracefully adjust the strength of her conviction to the strength of the evidence. Firmness is a quality of mental agility.

第三條是堅定。你肯定不想做一個聽到些許反對的聲音就放棄自己觀點的人。另一方面，你肯定也不願罔顧所有證據，死抱着一個觀點不放。堅定這一美德就存在於軟弱和頑固的中間點上。堅定地持有某些觀念的人，可以用可靠的素材搭建起穩固的世界觀，但仍然樂於接觸新信息。她能夠根據證據的力度，優雅地調整自己對某個觀點的相信程度。堅定也是一種機敏。

Fourth, there is humility, which is not letting your own desire for status get in the way of accuracy. The humble person fights against vanity and self-importance. He's not writing those sentences people write to make themselves seem smart; he's not thinking of himself much at all. The humble researcher doesn't become arrogant toward his subject, assuming he has mastered it. Such a person is open to learning from anyone at any stage in life.

第四條是謙遜，有了它，你就不會讓對地位的渴望妨礙自己做出準確的判斷。謙遜的人會與虛榮和自大做鬥爭。他的筆下不會出現人們常寫的那些讓自己看起來很聰明的句子；他根本不是自視甚高的人。謙遜的研究人員不會在其研究領域妄自尊大，想當然地認爲自己精通一切。無論處於人生的哪個階段，這樣的人都願意向他人學習。

Fifth, there is autonomy. You don't want to be a person who slavishly adopts whatever opinion your teacher or some author gives you. On the other hand, you don't want to reject all guidance from people who know what they are talking about. Autonomy is the median of knowing when to bow to authority and when not to, when to follow a role model and when not to, when to adhere to tradition and when not to.

第五條是自主。你肯定不想盲從於導師或哪個作家表達的任何觀點。另一當方面，你肯定也不願將那些內行人士的所有指導拒之門外。自主的美德在於，知道在什麼時候該服從權威，什麼時候該堅持己見；什麼時候該向榜樣學習，什麼時候該擺脫榜樣；什麼時候該遵循傳統，什麼時候該予以摒棄。

Finally, there is generosity. This virtue starts with the willingness to share knowledge and give others credit. But it also means hearing others as they would like to be heard, looking for what each person has to teach and not looking to triumphantly pounce upon their errors.

最後一條是慷慨。這種美德的起點是願意分享知識，並給予他人應有的承認。不過，慷慨也意味着，在別人希望發出聲音時予以傾聽，尋找每個人能爲人師表之處，不去洋洋自得地在他人身上糾錯。

We all probably excel at some of these virtues and are deficient in others. But I'm struck by how much of the mainstream literature on decision-making treats the mind as some disembodied organ that can be programed like a computer.

在這些美德中，我們可能都是在某些方面出色，在另一些方面有所欠缺。但讓我感觸的是，居然有那麼多關於制定決策方面的主流文章將思想當成某種脫離個人的東西，能像臺計算機那樣按編好的程序操作。

In fact, the mind is embedded in human nature, and very often thinking well means pushing against the grain of our nature — against vanity, against laziness, against the desire for certainty, against the desire to avoid painful truths. Good thinking isn't just adopting the right technique. It's a moral enterprise and requires good character, the ability to go against our lesser impulses for the sake of our higher ones.

實際上，思想蘊含在人性之中，而在很多情況下，好好思考意味着戰勝我們的本性——抗擊虛榮、懶惰、對確定性的渴求、對避免痛苦事實的渴望。好的思維不僅僅是採用正確的技巧。它是一種道德勇氣，需要良好的品性，是克服低等衝動來獲取更高尚目標的能力。

Montaigne once wrote that "We can be knowledgeable with other men's knowledge, but we can't be wise with other men's wisdom." That's because wisdom isn't a body of information. It's the moral quality of knowing how to handle your own limitations. Warren Buffett made a similar point in his own sphere, "Investing is not a game where the guy with the 160 I.Q. beats the guy with the 130 I.Q. Once you have ordinary intelligence, what you need is the temperament to control the urges that get other people into trouble."

蒙田曾寫道，“即使我們可以憑藉別人的知識成爲學者，但要成爲哲人，卻只能靠我們自己的智慧。”這是因爲，智慧並非大量信息的簡單集合。它是一種知曉如何應對自身侷限性的道德品質。沃倫·巴菲特(Warren Buffett)曾在其領域中發表過類似的見解，“投資不是智商160的傢伙打敗智商130的人。只要你智力正常，你只需要自己的性情能夠控制住讓別人陷入麻煩的衝動。”

Character tests are pervasive even in modern everyday life. It's possible to be heroic if you're just sitting alone in your office. It just doesn't make for a good movie.

即便是在當代日常生活中，對個人品質的考驗也無處不在。就算你只是獨自坐在辦公室裏，也可能成爲英雄。只不過，這拍不成一部勁爆的電影。