高質量英語演講&專訪影片哪裡看?
請您點選上方“精彩英語演講”,並“設為星標”

全網最新的英語演講&專訪第一時間為您奉上


當地時間5月17日,美國哥倫比亞大學舉行2023年畢業典禮。哥倫比亞大學校長李·卡羅爾·布林格(Lee Carroll Bollinger)發表畢業演說。
現年73歲的布林格於2002年開始擔任哥倫比亞大學校長,迄今已經20餘年,即將離任。這是他最後一次以哥倫比亞大學校長的身份發表畢業演講。

在此次演講中,布林格沒有涉及“宏大敘事”的話題,而是圍繞如何成為一個立足於當今世界的人,以及培養和發展什麼樣的個人品質展開。在演講中,他給所有畢業生提供了10條非常實用的人生建議。
他重點講到,人類的本性並不是與生俱來的開放。即使專家,對自己和我們的世界也是所知甚少。要認識到自己巨大的無知,看到很多問題的複雜性,並保持個人的開放性!

↓↓↓ 上下滑動,檢視雙語演講稿 ↓↓↓
It is my very great honor, indeed privilege and joy, to welcome you all here on this very special morning, in this glorious academic setting, to this magnificent occasion. I am especially sentimental today as this will be my last Commencement speech after serving more than two decades as president of Columbia University. I like to think that we are graduating together. I am sure that you and I both will hold this moment in our hearts for the rest of our lives.
On a personal note, I’m pleased to say I have a job. I now return to the life of a law professor, a career I began at more or less your age in 1973, two years after graduating from our Law School. I have loved being president of this great academic institution. By any measure I can think of, it has been a worthy way to spend my life and, most importantly, a transformative education in itself.
This transition for me is somewhat complicated (a word you will hear me say a lot this morning). I feel some elements of sadness as I leave behind colleagues, every one a dear friend, and adjust to a world in which I am increasingly unneeded. But, certainly, I am delighted to have more space and time in life for other things — perhaps the way your families felt when you went off to school. However, endings are a part of life, as this occasion so poignantly symbolizes, and I couldn’t be happier that Minouche Shafik will become our next President.
So let me say, personally and on behalf of the faculty, staff, and administration, how thankful we are to each and every one of you for enriching our lives, and this appreciation extends to all who have supported you throughout your academic journey. Please take a moment to thank them as well.
I like to think that we are graduating together. I am sure that you and I both will hold this moment in our hearts for the rest of our lives.
I thought a lot about what to say to you on this occasion. One naturally feels an expectation to offer thoughts as profound as this moment is in your lives. Given all that is happening in the world, you might well expect me to talk about big issues and, in particular, big threats to democracy. But it strikes me that you are already well-versed in civilization-scale problems that your generation has been tasked with solving.
What I can do, and I hope to do, is to sum up a little part of what I have learned over time contributes to a good life. I am interested in the seemingly simple matter of how to be a person in the world and what qualities to nurture and develop. I don’t have a precise name for what I’m going to talk about, but, in general, it’s about developing a certain disposition of openness — something frequently commented on, but little appreciated in how hard it is to achieve and sustain.
Being open-minded, whether as a society or as an individual, has many models. The place we typically start in thinking about the subject is the First Amendment and the sacred principle of freedom of speech. That is something I happen to know a little about.
But I am not turning to the First Amendment for the reason you might think — as some kind of article of faith that we all should strive to live by — in fact, quite the opposite in many respects. I understand why, in this current age, some of you may feel the First Amendment protects too many bad things, giving oxygen to the toxic forces that divide us. To that I would say, that’s a legitimate debate and always has been and always will. Rather, I want to use the First Amendment as a point of reference as we set about the far more complex task of creating our own, our own personal “free speech,” as it were.
This is where we decide for ourselves how to think, learn, tolerate or not, engage with others or not, including those with whom we are closest. I propose that we see life as having different ways, or layers, of trying to achieve the same thing and compare them and look at how they intersect. I see the First Amendment as a point of departure, not a destination, as it were. We are letting ourselves off the hook when we expect society to conform to standards that we know from our own lives are too unyielding to accommodate life’s infinite subtleties.
But we begin with free speech and the First Amendment.
What I can do, and I hope to do, is to sum up a little part of what I have learned over time contributes to a good life.
In the United States, we proudly have decided — primarily through Supreme Court cases over the last century — that the government, or the “State,” should not “censor” speech except in extreme situations (for example, when it poses a serious and imminent risk of violence). This means that we must withhold imposing sanctions on speech that is racist, or antisemitic, or materially and dangerously false. We exercise this self-restraint only towards behavior we classify as “speech” (a puzzle in itself) and we embed it as a fundamental principle in the Constitution. To the questions why and to what ends we say the following:
First, we recognize that human nature is not naturally open to other beliefs and ideas. We are made for intolerance, not tolerance.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., expressed this premise explicitly and succinctly, in 1920, as he initiated the cascade of jurisprudence we live by today. He acknowledged: “Persecution for the expression of opinions seems to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your premises or your power and want a result with all your heart you naturally express your wishes in law and sweep away the opposition. To allow opposition by speech seems to indicate that you think the speech impotent, . . . or that you do not care whole-heartedly for the result, or that you doubt either your power or your premises.”
So, intolerance, or “persecution,” towards other beliefs and opinions is “perfectly logical.” But that’s not the end of the story, Holmes says famously. We need to reject these natural impulses and aim for something higher, namely “truth.” For when we realize “that time has upset many fighting faiths,” then we “come to believe . . . that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas — that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.”
This, as it were, has become the American creed.
And it is a wonderful and really glorious thing. But, given the equally problematic premise and the ideal, it is no wonder that each new generation must work to understand and live by this faith. And it’s also odd, more intricate than this, because we do not live by this faith throughout society and, certainly not, in our own lives, even when we have the same goals in mind. Take where we are right this minute.
My focus today is how we build within ourselves a disposition to be open-minded that is authentic, lasting, and ultimately a force for positive change.
In the academic world, a very different framework applies in the search for truth. Here the quest is bounded by strict norms of objectivity, reason, civility, peer review, full attribution and constant skepticism applied to one’s own ideas. In this realm, what I like to refer to as the Scholarly Temperament prevails, and for those who abridge the norms, the penalties (the “censorship,” as it were, by another name) are severe — non-promotion, and even exclusion. As with the First Amendment commitment to free speech, the Scholarly Temperament does not come easily. It is only achieved by “education” and mental discipline.
Here, then, are two worlds I — and you — know well. They are very different in character, very different in the precepts about the permissible intellectual traits, yet both are dedicated to the discovery of truth. One is like a wilderness, and the other a manicured garden. I won’t here go into how to square the two worlds in a society such as ours, nor whether they even need to be squared. My main point takes a different path.
What I want to get to is our own lives, the ones that each of us constructs day-after-day. None of us would choose personally to live according to the dictates of the First Amendment or the Scholarly Temperament. They may well be appropriate for their respective spheres, and they may be each in their own way models to turn to for guidance as we create our own. But they will not work for ordinary life, even for the same goal.
Here is where my recommendations come in. Let me say first, however, that I am not trying to solve the larger questions each of us confronts about who we will be, or what beliefs we will hold, or with what degrees of intensity and conviction. We need courage to fight for justice.That is another topic. My focus today is how we build within ourselves a disposition to be open-minded that is authentic, lasting, and ultimately a force for positive change.
So, here are some ideas I have turned to for help. I have found them useful in building my own understanding and knowledge, in feeling freer and happier, and for nurturing relationships with others. There are ten. (I say under my breath.)
We need to see that our natural inclination is to be closed-minded, not open-minded. We are not born believing in free speech or openness. We have to learn to be this other way.
The first, and in many ways the most important, recommendation is to be constantly alert to our natural impulses that lead us astray. Here you need to start where the First Amendment starts. Holmes was right — we will have our beliefs and the more strongly we hold them the more we will want to protect them from contradiction and rejection. But our impulse is even more dangerous than Holmes suggested. Not only do we want to “persecute” opposition, we also want to join with others in feeling fortified and righteous in doing so. We want to agree to agree. In other words, we need to see that our natural inclination is to be closed-minded, not open-minded. We are not born believing in free speech or openness. We have to learn to be this other way.
From there I think it’s helpful to develop a conscious awareness of how little we — even experts — actually know about ourselves and our world. Human knowledge is vast, and stupendous, as this University attests, as a repository of human knowledge. But our ignorance is far greater. I love and have enormous respect for expertise, but you have to be careful not to let it be intimidating. And the best way to do that is to peer into our shared ignorance, for that is where we find our sense of shared humanity and where old and new things await our discovery.
Next, for those things we do and can know, we must always work on seeing their complexity as deeply as we can. The mind naturally simplifies things, and looks for and assumes there are answers. Sometimes there are, but more often there are choices to be made. I always tell my students to try to make the problems we study as complex as possible. And I suggest you follow the tried-and-true method of academics to ready their minds, by beginning every response by saying: “Well, it’s complicated, . . .” and then go on from there.
Next, once you see the centrifugal forces against openness, and you see the path ahead, you realize this is something that happens only by continuous practice; by habit. You have to make it part of who you are, and do it over and over again. Just saying to people, “Be open” is like saying to someone, “Go play the piano.” You have to work at it, build your capacities, gain agility and strength — that’s why pianists do scales, and these are scales for open-mindedness.
Now, when you are in conversations with people, which is a great way to learn, you should always ask more questions than give answers. Everyone has something to teach us, something of unique interest, and your task is always to find that. Keep the proportion of questions to answers at least at 80%. Given human nature, I predict you will have no problems succeeding in this (unless you run into someone who was at this Commencement, who actually listened to what I’m saying, and who was persuaded—a vanishingly small pool of people, I realize).
Finally, know that aging makes it all much easier. The older you grow the less certain you are and the more you appreciate what humans have done with curiosity.
Then try this: When you encounter a problem, an issue on which reasonable people disagree, imagine all the arguments you would make, until the point where no alternative seems possible. Then start all over again, imagine you are the other person and make their arguments to the same end in your mind. And THEN try to hold both arguments in your head at once. This is very hard to do.
Seven, always remember that the problems of life may be different in consequences, but are more or less equal in complexity. As your parents will no doubt agree, deciding which school to send your child to can be just as vexing as any matter of American foreign policy. Do not be dismissive of any opportunity to bear witness to the difficulties of making the “right” call under any circumstances.
Remember, too, that being open is not only a way to truth and understanding but also helps build relationships. I learned a long time ago that in marriage, family life, and friendship there is no such thing as a contract. “But we agreed” does not work when feelings change. Empathy is a branch of openness, and empathy is crucial to any relationship at any level.
Keep notes. Ask yourself, what have I learned, why didn’t I understand that, and how well did I follow my own principles. Everyone from researchers to wine experts knows that by writing down your impressions you understand your experience better and have a reference point for the future.
And, finally, know that aging makes it all much easier. The older you grow the less certain you are and the more you appreciate what humans have done with curiosity. Age will help you out, making you more patient with yourself and others, and more willing to be open to the baffling but exhilarating mysteries of the world.
So, there are the ten ideas: know your bad impulses; feel our vast ignorance; work at seeing the complexity of things, not the answers; make it a habit; ask more questions than provide answers; imagine you are the person you disagree with; see complexity in ordinary life; be open and empathetic in relationships; keep notes; and let age help you out.
I’ve been very fortunate to have my professional life correspond to my personal life: freedom of speech, the great American university, and being a law professor and president of Columbia have all been interwoven. This has given me a mine of precious materials from which to draw, from the national to the quotidian. I love each, and I love them all together. I still do not understand all I need to, but as they intersect, I understand each better. I hope and expect you will find the same is true in your lives.
Let me return to my opening remark that this is my last Commencement address. The “commencement speech” is one of the hardest in life to give. No remarks can live up to the meaning that this has for all of you. It is a bit of a trap because when you try to close the gap the risk is that you will end up with the cliché and the banal. Enough said on that. (I only ask that you give me credit for being self-aware.) But, for sure, the commencement speech focuses the mind. And, if you’re ever asked to give one, I strongly urge you to say — yes, and then get out of town as quickly as possible.
My deepest congratulations to all of you, and especially to my fellow Graduates of 2023.
Thank you.
在這個特別的早晨,我很榮幸歡迎各位來到這個特別的場合。
今天我特別傷感,因為這將是我擔任哥倫比亞大學校長20多年的最後一次畢業典禮演講。我想我們是一起畢業,我相信你和我都將在餘生中把這一刻銘記在心。
但是就我個人而言,我很高興地說我找到了一份工作,我將回到哥倫比亞大學法學院繼續教書——這是我1973年開始的職業生涯,我從哥倫比亞大學法學院畢業兩年後,就開始從事法學教育的職業,那時我和你們差不多大。
我很喜歡擔任這所偉大的大學的校長。無論從哪方面來看,這都是我度過一生的一種值得的方式,最重要的是,這本身就是一場改變我個人的教育。
離任校長重新當老師對我來說有點複雜。當我離開同事們,去適應一個我個人不再那麼重要的世界時,我感到有些悲傷。
但是,我也很高興在生活中有更多的空間和時間來做其他事情——這也許就像你去上學時你的家人的感受一樣。然而,結束也是生活的一部分,我非常高興米努什·沙菲克將成為我們的下一任校長!
因此,請允許我以個人名義,並代表全體教職員工和管理人員,對你們每一位豐富了我們生活的人表示感謝,並向所有在你們的學術生涯中支援過你們的人表示感謝!

我想了很多關於今天演講的話題,很多人會期待我能夠提供以一些深刻的想法。你很可能期望我談論重大問題。但令我驚訝的是,你們已經精通你們這一代人肩負的解決文明問題的任務。
我能做的,也是我希望做的,就是總結我多年來所學到的對美好生活有幫助的一小部分體會。我感興趣的是如何成為一個立足於當今世界的人,以及培養和發展什麼樣的個人品質。
這個話題這似乎很簡單,我沒有一個確切的主題來形容我將要談論的東西,但是,總的來說,它是關於發展某種開放性的傾向——這是經常被評論的,但很少有人意識到,實現和維持這種開放性是多麼困難。
無論是作為社會還是作為個人,開放有很多模式。我們通常從美國憲法關於言論自由的《第一修正案》思考這個問題,碰巧我對這個有點研究。(注:哥大校長布林格是研究《第一修正案》領域的法學專家)
我引用《第一修正案》的原因,你可能會認為它是我們所有人都應該努力遵循的一種信仰,事實上,在很多方面恰恰相反。
在今天這個時代,你們中的一些人可能會覺得《第一修正案》保護了太多不好的東西,給分裂我們的有毒力量提供了氧氣。
相反,我則想把《第一修正案》作為一個參照點,開啟我們著手創造我們個人的“言論自由”這一更為複雜的任務。
這是我們自己決定如何思考、學習、容忍或不容忍、與他人交往或不交往——包括與我們最親密的人的基本點。
我們認識到,人類的本性並不自然地對其他信仰和思想開放。我們生來就不寬容,而不是寬容。
因此,我今天要講的重點是,我們如何在自己的內心建立一種開放的心態,這種心態是真實的、持久的,最終是一種積極改變的力量。

在學術界,一個特殊的框架適用於尋求真理。在這個框架下,這種追求受到客觀、理性、文明、同行評議、完全歸因和對自己的想法始終持懷疑態度的嚴格規範的限制。
我喜歡稱之為“學者氣質”(Scholarly Temperament)的東西佔主導地位。對於那些不準守規範的人來說,懲罰是嚴厲的——他們無法得到晉升,甚至被排斥。就像《第一修正案》對言論自由的承諾一樣,學者氣質來之不易,它只能透過“教育”和精神紀律來實現。
但是,我們每個人日復一日構建自己的生活。沒有人會選擇按照憲法第一修正案或學者氣質的規定來生活。
因此,以下是我尋求幫助的一些想法。我發現它們對我建立自己的理解和知識,感覺更自由、更快樂,以及培養與他人的關係都很有用。

第一個建議,就是要時刻警惕那些把我們引入歧途的自然衝動。我們會有自己的信仰,我們越是堅定地持有信仰,我們就越想保護它們免受矛盾和拒絕。但我們的衝動是危險,我們不僅想要“反對”持反對意見者,我們還想和其他人一起感到這樣做的正確性。“我們只會同意我們所同意的。”
換句話說,我們需要看到,我們的自然傾向是思想封閉,而不是開放。我們並非生來就相信言論自由或公開。我們必須學會改變這種狀態。
第二,我認識到我們——即使是專家——實際上對自己和我們的世界所知甚少。正如這所大學作為人類知識寶庫所證明的那樣,人類的知識是浩瀚而驚人的,但我們的無知要大得多。
我喜歡並非常尊重專業知識,但你必須小心,不要讓它嚇到你。做到這一點的最好方法是探索我們共同的未知事物,因為這是我們發現共同人性的地方,也是新舊事物等待我們發現的地方。
第三,對於那些我們所做和能夠知道的事情,我們必須始終儘可能深入地瞭解它們的複雜性。
大腦會自然而然地簡化事物,尋找並假設有答案。我總是告訴我的學生,要把我們學習的問題儘可能地複雜化。我建議你遵循學術界行之有效的方法,讓他們的頭腦做好準備,在每次回應開始時說:“嗯,這很複雜,……”然後從那裡開始。
第四,如果你看到了反對開放的離心力,看到了前方的道路,你就會意識到這是隻有透過持續的練習才會發生的事情——這是一種習慣。你必須讓這種習慣成為你的一部分,一遍又一遍地做。說“保持開放”,就像對別人說“去彈鋼琴吧”一樣常見。你必須努力學習,培養你的能力,獲得敏捷和力量——這就是鋼琴家學習音階的原因,這些音階代表著思想的開放。
第五,當你與別人交談時,這其實是一個很好的學習方式,你應該總是問更多的問題而不是回答。
每個人都能教給我們一些東西,一些獨特的東西,你的任務就是找到它。問題與答案的比例至少保持在80%。考慮到人的本性,我預測你們在這方面不會有任何問題(除非你們遇到參加過這次畢業典禮的人,他真正聽了我說的話,並且被說服了——我知道,這是很少的一部分人)。
第六,試著這樣做:當你遇到一個問題——一個理智的人不同意的問題時,想象你會提出的所有論點,直到沒有其他更好選擇的地步。然後從頭再來,想象你是另一個人,在你的腦海裡把他們的論點都列出來。然後試著在你的頭腦中同時記住這兩個論點。這是很難做到的。
第七,永遠記住,生活中的問題可能結局不同,但其複雜性或多或少是相同的。你的父母無疑會同意,決定送孩子去哪所學校可能和美國外交政策的任何問題一樣令人煩惱。在任何情況下,都不要忽視做出“正確”決定的困難。
第八,請記住,敞開心扉不僅是通往真相和理解的途徑,還有助於建立關係。我很久以前就知道,在婚姻、家庭生活和友誼中,沒有所謂的契約。當感情發生變化時,"但我們說好了"是沒用的。同理心是開放的一個分支,同理心對任何層次的關係都是至關重要的。
第九,記錄。問問你自己,我學到了什麼,為什麼我不明白,我在多大程度上遵循了自己的原則。從研究人員到葡萄酒專家,每個人都知道,透過寫下你的感受,你可以更好地理解你的體驗,併為未來提供一個參考點。
最後,要知道年齡的增長會讓這一切變得更容易。年齡越大,你就越不確定,你就越感激人類出於好奇心所做的一切。年齡會幫助你走出困境,讓你對自己和他人更有耐心,更願意接受這個世界上令人困惑但又令人興奮的奧秘。
所以,這裡總結這十個建議:
1、瞭解自己不好的衝動;2、感受我們巨大的無知;3、關注事物的複雜性,而不是問題的答案;4、讓開放成為一種習慣;5、問更多的問題而不是提供答案;6、想象你是你不同意的那個人;7、看到平凡生活中的複雜性;8、在人際關係中保持開放和同理心;9、記錄;10、讓年齡來幫助你。
我非常幸運,我的職業生涯與我的個人生活相呼應:言論自由、偉大的美國大學、作為一名法學教授和哥倫比亞大學校長,這一切都交織在一起。
這給了我一座寶貴的材料庫,從國家到日常生活,我都可以從中挖掘。今天,我仍然不能理解我需要理解的所有問題,但隨著它們的交融,我對每一個問題都有了更好的理解。我希望並期待你們會發現在你們的生活中也是如此。
我向你們所有人致以最深切的祝賀,尤其是我的2023屆畢業生們。
謝謝!

哥大校長2022年畢業演講

↓↓↓ 上下滑動,檢視演講稿 ↓↓↓
On behalf of our Trustees, our faculty, our distinguished alumni, our families, and our many friends of Columbia University, it is my very, very great pleasure to welcome all of you gathered here today—and, notably, for the first IN PERSON commencement in three years. I am also delighted to welcome the tens of thousands of you who are joining us virtually, a way of being together we have come to know so intimately. We are all here to continue our 268-year tradition of celebrating the significant achievements of our graduates, representing seventeen schools, along with our affiliate institutions of Teachers College and Barnard.
So, I cannot imagine beginning my remarks to you in any other way than by acknowledging the extraordinary context, really the historical context, in which you have been students at Columbia and in which you have arrived at this remarkable milestone in your lives. This is always a magnificent ceremony—striking in this grand academic setting, in the parade of colors and in the joyful faces.Satisfying the requirements for a Columbia degree is never easy; the demands are as rigorous as any in the world. So, you should, indeed, be very proud. We, certainly, are of you. But, as much as we, your faculty, admire you and are proud of what you have achieved, nothing can compare to the pride of your family and friends who have supported you all along the way. Please take this opportunity to thank them.Under ordinary conditions, we justifiably celebrate the sheer labor and talents that have brought you to this point. But your Columbia journey has been nothing like any I have ever witnessed. I can barely begin to touch the surface of the times: A once-in-a-century pandemic; life-jarring climate-induced catastrophes jolting us into a state-of-emergency mindset; a world flirting dangerously with authoritarianism, repressing human rights and yielding naked aggression to a degree not seen since the era leading up to the Second World War; violent acts of racism that add still another horrible chapter in the struggles of Black Americans to overcome invidious discrimination, made worse by a refusal of many citizens even to acknowledge the historical and ongoing truths of this injustice; and of other innocent groups, suffering other injustices. Together these forces seem biblical, in scope and in gravity. As I recite these multiple and intersecting plagues of our time, I know each one of us is privately taking stock of how these events—singly or altogether—have affected our own lives and the lives of those close to us. Collectively, we can be certain that many among us have suffered deeply; and not one of us has been untouched. To all of you, therefore, in recognition of the many challenges you have had to endure and overcome, we say with more conviction and more respect than ever before, Congratulations to the Class of 2022.
We have, it seems, entered what we might call the Age of Disinformation.
My remarks to you this morning are about matters that are dear to my heart (and I hope dear to yours, as well)—as they involve free speech, deep knowledge and expertise, universities and their role in making a good society and the responsibilities we all bear, especially in these momentous times, to think clearly and to think well, no matter what we are doing. It is common for me on these occasions to speak about the glorious principles of freedom of expression and its offspring of academic freedom. But on this day what concerns me is a different problem—not of censorship, but instead of an over-abundance, an excess, an abuse of freely expressed but deeply misguided speech that threatens a moral, ethical, just, wise, and sane world. I’m concerned about the increasingly pervasive misuse of free speech.Let me start with what is clear and critically important to recognize—namely, that the modern phenomenon of systematic campaigns of disinformation is spawning and amplifying the very crises I noted at the outset. Denials of the effectiveness of vaccines, of climate science, of election integrity, of the past and ongoing effects of discrimination—these and so many other malicious efforts at misinformation are polluting our collective mind. We are all very much aware that the great advancement of our age, the Internet, is being used to augment the malign effectiveness of these campaigns, and probably to a degree never encountered before in human societies. Just a few decades ago a crackpot theory or idea had a lot of hard work ahead in order to break into the general population where it could use anger and paranoia to take root. Now it happens in seconds. We have, it seems, entered what we might call the Age of Disinformation.This is no small matter. From a First Amendment standpoint, I can tell you that this poses urgent questions. Over the course of the last century, and especially in the last half century, we have created the most speech-protective society in the world—indeed, in human history. At its core, there is a simple premise: Bad speech, including falsehoods and lies, is better remedied by opportunities for more speech rather than by government intervention. This means we live in a wilderness of human thoughts and ideas, with the hope that we might become more intellectually self-reliant and capable of tolerance.We know by nature we are not perfect. We know there is a natural human impulse to latch onto beliefs, to group with others who believe similarly and will provide mutual reinforcement of our rightness, which then manifests itself in a concerted drive to convert or stop those who disagree, thus producing a cycle of escalating intolerance. We are not born believing in the First Amendment. Indeed, openness of mind is counter-intuitive; it must be learned both in principle and in lived experience, and our worst impulses that we constantly have to live with mean it will always be in jeopardy. Which is why we had to create a hard-to-change constitutional freedom and then take it to an extreme, as a lesson in life in tolerance. But the profound question before us today is: Does this basic premise, does all of this still hold true?
Deliberate disinformation and propaganda also, and more importantly, undermine the very idea of deep knowledge and expertise itself.
Like any fundamental principle, however, the First Amendment is far more complex than this little précis presents, and we have allowed it to adjust to new circumstances in the past. It is worth noting that the last new technology of communication—namely, broadcast media—was regulated in the public interest precisely in order to deal with many of the very same dangers we now see with social media and related platforms on the Internet. This stands as a potential model for us now. And that is where the debate is taking place.But let’s return to understanding the problems we are facing and the gravity of the threats. There is more than simply the circulation of particular falsehoods. Deliberate disinformation and propaganda also, and more importantly, undermine the very idea of deep knowledge and expertise itself. Disinformation is now powering a particularly pungent form of populism in which experts are discredited, even ridiculed, and an arrogance of feeling one can believe whatever one wants to believe is settling in and becoming normal. This attitude is in direct conflict with universities, because we are society’s primary institutions for preserving and advancing what humanity has struggled to learn over the millennia. Over the past several years, our own faculty have been targets of this abuse.But the dangers are even worse: Attacking expertise is a common tool of fascism and authoritarian regimes. When we discredit a particular piece of knowledge, we make it harder to think well. We undermine the essential task of a self-determining society to draw on the vast body of information and thought painfully developed over centuries and held safely within our academic institutions and across our cultural institutions and professions. Falsehoods today are increasingly accompanied by a rejection of a necessary humility about the limits of our knowledge and of a basic trust in others who have devoted their lives and careers to understand deeply an important subject.So, the stakes are, indeed, very high, and we, universities, along with the democracy as a whole, are vulnerable to these campaigns and new conditions. The issue is then what comes next. Let us assume that the First Amendment will be rethought. It is time to ask: How can we think about all of this outside the First Amendment?
“Good thinking” is a critical goal of any individual or society. The rejection of “bad thinking”—however difficult it is to define precisely—is a necessary condition of that.
There is, of course, much to say about this, but I have two key points: One is not to let free speech stand in the way of condemning disinformation and doing all we can to stop it; the other is to think of universities as the models for society and how to think.It is increasingly dangerous to assume, as many long have, that the strong protections afforded falsehoods under the First Amendment necessarily implies that it is wrong to do what we can to stop falsehoods and disinformation generally. Is “free speech” an “absolute,” as some would have it, and should we, accordingly, refrain from doing anything to stop bad speech in ways beyond official censorship? My answer to that is: Not for a second should we think that way. That way lies madness and the loss of a well-educated society.“Good thinking” is a critical goal of any individual or society. The rejection of “bad thinking”—however difficult it is to define precisely—is a necessary condition of that.Indeed, this is what we call education—the development of the human capacity to think well—with reason from knowledge, and with respect for facts and a reasonable openness to relevant ideas and opinions. This is not easy, to be sure, which is why we devote so many years to arrive at where you are now.In fact, the very human impulses noted at the outset that lead us to improperly censor others also lead us to think badly by not rejecting what we should. Not to put too fine a point on it, but, if a student receives an F for a lazy paper filled with falsehoods, it will not do the student any good to proclaim that the paper should not be penalized because it was an exercise in freedom of speech. “Free speech” is not an end in itself but a thumb on the scale in a particular direction. It would make no sense to order our lives entirely in that direction. Keep it always in mind, of course, but do not allow it to take precedence over other principles we value—in the case of the failing paper, the importance of sharp thinking and quality writing.
Whenever I let my mind try to take in the full breadth of what happens here—in laboratories, in clinics, in libraries, in studies, in classrooms, and work all over the planet—I am exhilarated.
This brings me, lastly, to the importance of institutions in society—institutions such as universities, the press, and other civic institutions. We need to recognize that these institutions are designed to help organize our discussions, not just about politics but, really, about everything. Those of us here today have been incredibly fortunate to be part of this great university. Whenever I let my mind try to take in the full breadth of what happens here—in laboratories, in clinics, in libraries, in studies, in classrooms, and work all over the planet—I am exhilarated. But I am also filled with humility because I know so little of all that is known here, and at similar institutions. To come to a university such as Columbia is to learn to be humble; to realize how little you know and always will.I love being president (I recommend the job highly!), not least because I get to know just a little bit more of that amazing whole. In this time of our many trials and crises, as we reap the benefits of universities, we need to do all we can to protect them. They are not perfect, for sure. I feel strongly, for example, that we need to make the boundaries between us and the rest of the world more permeable and more connected in the betterment of human society and the world. This mission, which I call the Fourth Purpose of the University—in addition to teaching and research and service—might help people more broadly feel more respectful of what we have to offer.But another reason I love being president of Columbia is the opportunity to be in your midst. As students in our classrooms and laboratories, you are what makes academic life worth living. We may be daunted by this troubled moment in history, but I am most certainly convinced, to the core of my being, that every one of you in your own way will help to solve these problems and to heal the world. You have demonstrated that human capacity to think well, and I know you will deploy it in meaningful and inspiring ways. Most of all, you will have the proper degree of humility that a truly great education instills.On this day, we celebrate you, all that you have accomplished, and the institution that nurtures us, especially in this new historical era we have entered.Congratulations to you, Class of 2022.
我謹代表哥倫比亞大學的校董、教員、校友、家人和朋友們,非常高興地歡迎你們聚集在這裡,迎來三年來首次的線下畢業典禮。我也很高興地歡迎成千上萬的觀眾們透過線上的方式加入我們。
此刻,我們在這裡延續哥倫比亞大學268年的傳統,慶祝17個學院和2個附屬學院的畢業生取得重要成就。
我無法想象用其他方式開始我的演講。你們在如此特殊的背景下,來到哥倫比亞大學求學,並且實現了生命中的這個非凡里程碑。
畢業典禮永遠是一個盛大的儀式,在這宏偉的學術氛圍裡,到處是五彩的顏色和歡樂的笑臉。達到哥倫比亞大學的學位要求從不是一件易事。這裡有著和世界上其他學府一樣嚴格的要求。你應該為自己感到驕傲,我們也欽佩你們,為你們所取得的成績感到自豪。
不過沒有什麼能與此刻你們家人、朋友心中的驕傲相比。他們支援著你們一路走到今天。
我們“習以為常”慶祝著你們的辛勤付出和才華,但你們在哥倫比亞大學的求學之旅與我所見過的全然不同。
當下時局詭譎,令人擔憂:百年一遇的大流行病;氣候問題引發的災難衝擊著我們的生活,使我們陷入緊急狀態;一個危險地玩弄威權主義、壓制人權、容忍赤裸裸侵略的世界,其程度是第二次世界大戰以來從未遇見的;種族主義的暴行使美國黑人的反歧視鬥爭陷入了又一個可怕的篇章,許多公民甚至拒絕承認這個不公平的歷史和真相,這些都使情況變得更糟。其他無辜的群體也遭受著不公正的待遇。這些力量加在一起,在範圍和嚴重性上都無法小視。當我回溯這個時代多重交織的瘟疫時,我知道我們每個人都在私下評估這些事件如何影響了我們和我們身邊的人。
我們可以確定,我們當中的許多人都深受影響。我們每個人都被觸動了。因此,在明白你們必須忍受和克服的諸多挑戰後,我們更堅定、更尊敬地對你們說,祝賀你們,2022屆的畢業生們。
接下來我的演講關乎我最關心的幾個議題,我希望這些議題對你來說也同樣重要:言論自由,深刻的學識和專業知識,大學及其在建設一個良好社會中的作用,以及我們在這段重要時期肩負的責任——如何清晰、全面地思考。
我常常在這樣的場合談論言論自由和因其衍生的學術自由的光輝。但今天,我擔心的是另一個問題——不是審查制度,而是那些過度地濫用自由表達而產生的大量嚴重誤導的言論,這些言論威脅著我們道德、倫理、公正、明智和理智的世界。我擔心濫用言論自由的現象越來越普遍。首先,我們必須認識到一個明確的、至關重要的問題,如今系統的造謠行徑正在滋生和放大我在開篇就指出的危機。否認疫苗的有效性、否認氣候科學、否認選舉的公正性、否認歧視對過去和現在造成的影響,這些以及如此多的其他惡意傳播錯誤資訊的行為正在侵害我們的思想。
我們都非常清楚,網際網路作為我們這個時代巨大的進步,正在被用來擴大這些危害行徑的影響,而且可能達到了人類社會從未遇到過的程度。就在幾十年前,一個瘋狂的理論或想法還需花費許多的精力才能走近普通群眾並利用憤怒和偏執紮根。而如今,這件事只需要幾秒鐘就能完成。我們似乎進入了一個可以稱之為虛假資訊的時代。這不是小事。從第一修正案的角度來看,我可以告訴你,這提出了一系列緊迫的問題。
在過去的一個世紀裡,特別是在過去的半個世紀裡,我們創造了世界上甚至是人類歷史上最能保護言論的社會。其核心是一個簡單的前提——包括謊言和謬誤在內的糟糕言論,透過更多的言論機會加以補救,而不是依靠政府的干預。這意味著我們生活在人類思想的荒野中,期望我們能在智力上更加自立、能力上更加寬容。我們天生就知道我們並不完美。我們知道,人類有一種自然的衝動就是抓住信仰,與有相似信仰的人聚集在一起,從而相互加強我們的正直,繼而形成一致的動力去改變或阻止那些持不同意見的人,由此產生一個不斷升級的不寬容迴圈。我們並非生來就相信第一修正案。事實上,思想的開放是違反直覺的。我們只有在規則和生活的經驗中才能學會思想開放,而我們不得不與之共存的最壞的衝動也將變得岌岌可危,這就是為什麼我們必須建立一個很難改變的憲法自由,把它發揮到極致。但今天擺在我們面前的深刻問題是,這個基本前提是否仍然成立。然而,就像任何其他的根本原則一樣,第一修正案遠比這些複雜得多,我們在過去已經允許它適應新的情況。值得注意的是,廣播媒體作為上一代新興通訊技術,正是為了應對我們現在在社交媒體和網際網路平臺上看到的許多問題,才建立在公眾利益的基礎上進行監管的。這對我們來說是一個潛在的模式,也是爭議開始的地方。
讓我們回到我們正在面臨的問題以及這些威脅的嚴重性。這不僅只是特定謊言的傳播,蓄意的虛假資訊和宣傳煽動正在嚴重削弱深厚學問和專業知識本身的理念。虛假資訊鼓吹起了強烈的民粹主義,這使得專家常常名譽掃地甚至被公然取笑,也讓那種自以為然、剛愎自用的傲慢態度愈演愈烈併成為常態。這種態度與大學格格不入,因為我們是社會中儲存和推進人類幾千年來奮鬥和學習成果的主要機構。在過去的幾年裡,我們的學院一直是虛假宣傳濫用的目標。更危險的是,攻擊專業人員、知識分子是法西斯主義和專制政權的常用手段。當我們詆譭某項特定知識時,仔細思考就變得更加困難。我們破壞了一個自決社會利用大量已知資訊和思想進行決策的基本任務,這些資訊和思想是數百年來歷經艱難發展出來的,並安全地儲存在我們的學術機構、文化機構和職業機構中。今天的謊言使人們對人類知識的侷限性缺乏必要的謙遜,對那些終其一生鑽研並深刻理解重要主題的專業人員缺乏基本信任。茲事體大,我們大學以及整個民主國家都容易受到這些行為和新情況的影響。問題是接下來會發生什麼?讓我們假設,第一修正案將被重新考慮。是時候去詢問沒有了第一修正案,我們該如何思考所有這些?這當然會引發很多想法,但我想提出兩個關鍵點。
一是不要讓言論自由阻止對虛假資訊的譴責並盡我們所能阻止它。二是將大學視為社會以及思想的典範。越來越多的人認為,第一修正案為虛假資訊提供了強有力的保護,即盡我們所能去阻止謊言和虛假資訊是錯誤的,這種假設是非常危險的。一個人擁有絕對的言論自由嗎?是否除了官方審查,我們不能採取任何措施來阻止不良言論?我的回答是絕對不應該這樣想。如此發展,我們就會陷入瘋狂並失去一個受到良好教育的社會。良好的思維至關重要,應該是任何個人或社會的目標。拒絕錯誤的想法,無論多麼難以準確定義,都是擁有良好思維的必要條件。這就是我們所說的教育,即培養人類良好的思考能力,從知識中推理,尊重事實,對相關思想和觀點保持合理的開放態度。這確實並不容易。這就是為什麼我們花了這麼多年培養你們到今天的水平。
事實上,我們在一開始就注意到,正是人性中的衝動讓我們不能恰當的感知他人,也讓我們因為無法拒絕我們應該做的事情而感到自責。舉個例子,如果一個學生因為一篇充滿謊言的懶惰論文被評為不合格,那麼宣稱該論文是一篇言論自由的練習因而不應該受到懲罰,對學生沒有任何好處。言論自由本身並不是目的,而是特定方向上的一個評估原則,完全朝那個方向安排我們的生活是沒有意義的,我們要牢記言論自由的原則,但不要讓它超越我們重視的其他原則。在剛才那個失敗論文的例子中,敏銳的思維和高質量的寫作是更加重要的。
最後,我想談一下機構在社會中的重要性。我們需要認識到,大學、新聞界和民間組織等機構的設立是為了幫助我們進行討論,不僅關於政治,而是關於一切。今天在座的我們非常幸運能夠成為這所偉大學府的一員。每當我嘗試全面瞭解這裡發生的一切——在實驗室、臨床、圖書館、教室——和全球各地的工作時,我都會感到振奮。但我也感到謙遜,因為我對這裡及類似機構所知道的一切知之甚少。來到像哥倫比亞大學這樣的機構,就是要學會謙虛,意識到你知道的其實很少。
我熱愛校長這個職位,我也強烈推薦這份工作,尤其是因為我對這個優秀的集體能有更多的瞭解。在這個充滿考驗和危機的時刻,當我們從大學中獲益時,我們需要盡我們所能來保護這些收穫。它們肯定不是完美的。例如,我強烈認為,大學需要與世界更交匯,聯絡更緊密,從而進一步改善人類社會。我把它稱之為大學除教學、研究和服務外的第四個使命,它會使人們更廣泛地尊重我們所提供的知識。我喜歡擔任哥大校長的另一個原因是我有機會走到你們中間,是你們讓學術生活變得有價值。儘管我們可能因歷史上這個令人不安的時刻感到信心不足,但我內心堅信,你們每個人都將以自己的方式幫助解決這些問題並治癒世界。你們已經展現了思考的能力,我知道你們會以有意義和鼓舞人心的方式去運用它。最重要的是,你將擁有真正偉大的教育所培養的適度謙遜。
今天,我們慶祝你們所取得的成就。在這個新的歷史時代,我們也慶祝這所大學對我們的培養。
祝賀你們,2022屆畢業生!

防止再次失聯,請立即關注備用號


想第一時間觀看高質量英語演講&採訪影片?把“精彩英語演講”設定為星標就對了!操作辦法就是:進入公眾號——點選右上角的●●●——找到“設為星標”點選即可。



