斯坦福大学演讲:别在不断优秀中沦落平庸
斯坦福大学演讲:别在不断优秀中沦落平庸
William Deresiewicz,威廉 · 德莱塞维茨,美国作家和文学评论家,美国《国家》杂志撰稿人和《新共和》杂志编辑。本文是他2010年在斯坦福大学的演讲的下半部分。接下来由学习啦小编为大家推荐斯坦福大学演讲:别在不断优秀中沦落平庸,希望对你有所帮助!
斯坦福大学演讲:别在不断优秀中沦落平庸
There is an alternative, however, and it may be one that hasn't occurred to you. Let me try to explain it by telling you a story about one of your peers, and the alternative that hadn't occurred to her. A couple of years ago, I participated in a panel discussion at Harvard that dealt with some of these same matters, and afterward I was contacted by one of the students who had come to the event, a young woman who was writing her senior thesis about Harvard itself, how it instills in its students what she called self-efficacy, the sense that you can do anything you want. Self-efficacy, or, in more familiar terms, self-esteem. There are some kids, she said, who get an A on a test and say, "I got it because it was easy." And there are other kids, the kind with self-efficacy or self-esteem, who get an A on a test and say, "I got it because I'm smart."
Again, there's nothing wrong with thinking that you got an A because you're smart. But what that Harvard student didn't realize—and it was really quite a shock to her when I suggested it—is that there is a third alternative. True self-esteem, I proposed, means not caring whether you get an A in the first place. True self-esteem means recognizing, despite everything that your upbringing has trained you to believe about yourself, that the grades you get—and the awards, and the test scores, and the trophies, and the acceptance letters—are not what defines who you are.
不过,还有另外一种情况,或许中年危机并不会发生在你身上。让我告诉你们一个同伴的故事来解释我的意思吧,还有一个她没有遇到过的可能。几年前,我在哈佛参加了一次小组讨论会,谈到这些问题。后来参加这次讨论的一个学生给我联系,这个哈佛学生正在写有关哈佛的毕业论文,讨论哈佛是如何给学生灌输她所说的“自我效能”,一种相信自己能做一切的意识。自我效能或更熟悉的说法“自我尊重”。她说有些在考试中得了优秀的有些学生会说“我得优秀是因为试题很简单。” 但另外一些学生,那种具有自我效能感或自我尊重的学生,考试得了优秀会说“我得优秀是因为我聪明。”
再说一遍,认为得了优秀是因为自己聪明的想法并没有任何错,不过,哈佛学生没有认识到的是他们没有第三种选择。当我指出这一点时, 她十分震惊。我指出,真正的自尊意味着最初根本就不在乎成绩是否优秀。真正的自尊意味着对此问题的足够认识:尽管你在成长过程中的一切都在教导你要相信自 己,但你所等获得的成绩,还有那些奖励、成绩、奖品、录取通知书等所有这一切,都不能来定义你是谁。
She also claimed, this young woman, that Harvard students take their sense of self-efficacy out into the world and become, as she put it, "innovative." But when I asked her what she meant by innovative, the only example she could come up with was "being CEO of a Fortune 500." That's not innovative, I told her, that's just successful, and successful according to a very narrow definition of success. True innovation means using your imagination, exercising the capacity to envision new possibilities.
But I'm not here to talk about technological innovation, I'm here to talk about a different kind. It's not about inventing a new machine or a new drug. It's about inventing your own life. Not following a path, but making your own path. The kind of imagination I'm talking about is moral imagination. "Moral" meaning not right or wrong, but having to do with making choices. Moral imagination means the capacity to envision new ways to live your life.
她还说,这个年轻的女孩子说哈佛学生把他们的自我效能带到了世界上,如她所说的“创新”。但当我问她“创新”意味着什么时,她能够想到的唯一例子不过是“世界大公司五百强的首席执行官”。我告诉她这不是创新,这只是成功,而且是狭义的成功而已。真正的创新意味着运用你的想象力,发挥你的潜力,创造新的可能性。
但这里我并不是在谈论技术创新,不是发明新机器或者制造一种新药,我谈论的是另外一种创新,是创造你自己的生活。不是走现成的道路,而是创造一条属于自己的道路。我谈论的想象力是道德想象力(moral imagination:心理学专业名词)。“道德”在这里无关对错,而是与选择有关。道德想象力意味着创造自己新生的能力。
It means not just going with the flow. It means not just "getting into" whatever school or program comes next. It means figuring out what you want for yourself, not what your parents want, or your peers want, or your school wants, or your society wants. Originating your own values. Thinking your way toward your own definition of success. Not simply accepting the life that you've been handed. Not simply accepting the choices you've been handed. When you walk into Starbucks, you're offered a choice among a latte and a macchiato and an espresso and a few other things, but you can also make another choice. You can turn around and walk out. When you walk into college, you are offered a choice among law and medicine and investment banking and consulting and a few other things, but again, you can also do something else, something that no one has thought of before.
Let me give you another counterexample. I wrote an essay a couple of years ago that touched on some of these same points. I said, among other things, that kids at places like Yale or Stanford tend to play it safe and go for the conventional rewards. And one of the most common criticisms I got went like this: What about Teach for America? Lots of kids from elite colleges go and do TFA after they graduate, so therefore I was wrong. TFA, TFA—I heard that over and over again. And Teach for America is undoubtedly a very good thing. But to cite TFA in response to my argument is precisely to miss the point, and to miss it in a way that actually confirms what I'm saying. The problem with TFA—or rather, the problem with the way that TFA has become incorporated into the system—is that it's just become another thing to get into.
它意味着不随波逐流,不是下一步要“进入”什么名牌大学或研究生院。而是要弄清楚自己到底想要什么,而不是父母、同伴、 学校、或社会想要什么。即确认你自己的价值观,思考迈向自己所定义的成功的道路,而不仅仅是接受别人给你的生活,不仅仅是接受别人给你的选择。当今走进星巴克咖啡馆,服务员可能让你在牛奶咖啡、加糖咖啡、特制咖啡等几样东西之间做出选择。但你可以做出另外的选择,你可以转身走出去。当你进入大学,人家给你众多选择,或法律或医学或投资银行和咨询以及其他,但你同样也可以做其他事,做从前根本没有人想过的事。
让我再举一个反面的例子。几年前我写过一篇涉及同类问题的文章。我说,那些在耶鲁和斯坦福这类名校的孩子往往比较谨慎,去追求一些稳妥的奖励。我得到的最常见的批评是:教育项目“为美国而教”如何?从名校出来的很多学生毕业后很多参与这个教育项目,因此我的观点是错误的。我一再听到TFA这个术语。“为美国而教”当然是好东西,但引用这个项目来反驳我的观点恰恰是不得要领,实际上正好证明了我想说的东西。“为美国而教”的问题 或者“为美国而教”已经成为体系一部分的问题,是它已经成为另外一个需要“进入”的门槛。