今天推薦的演講者是：Johann Hari，發(fā)布于2015年的TED演講大會！

從可卡因到美食，再到花花網(wǎng)絡(luò)，現(xiàn)在令我們上癮的東西真的越來越多了，大家也逐漸把這些“上癮源”稱為“垃圾快樂”。也許成癮最大的原因并不在生理上！

Everything you think you know about addiction is wrong

Johann HariOne of my earliest memories is of trying to wake up one of my relatives and not being able to. And I was just a little kid, so I didn't really understand why, but as I got older, I realized we had drug addiction in my family, including later cocaine addiction.

我早年間的一個回憶就是試圖去叫醒一個親戚，但卻叫不醒他。我當(dāng)時只是一個小孩，所以我不明白為什么，但隨著年齡的增長，我意識到家里有人XD上癮了，包括后來的可卡因癮。

?

I'd been thinking about it a lot lately, partly because it's now exactly 100 years since drugs were first banned in the United States and Britain, and we then imposed that on the rest of the world.?

我最近一直在想這件事，部分原因是現(xiàn)在距離美國和英國首次禁止DP已經(jīng)整整100年了，然后我們也將這一項禁令推廣到了全世界。

It's a century since we made this really fateful decision to take addicts and punish them and make them suffer, because we believed that would deter them;

我們做這一項生死攸關(guān)的決定已經(jīng)有一個世紀(jì)了，讓癮君子受到懲罰，讓他們受苦，因為我們相信這會阻止他們；

?

it would give them an incentive to stop. And a few years ago, I was looking at some of the addicts in my life who I love, and trying to figure out if there was some way to help them. And I realized there were loads of incredibly basic questions I just didn't know the answer to, like, what really causes addiction? Why do we carry on with this approach that doesn't seem to be working, and is there a better way out there that we could try instead?

這會激勵他們停止XD。幾年前，我看著那些在我身邊的至親，飽受毒癮困擾，我想知道是否有辦法幫助他們。我意識到有許多難以置信的問題，我不知道如何回答。比如，是什么導(dǎo)致上癮？為什么我們要繼續(xù)采取這種似乎行不通的做法，還有沒有更好的辦法可以取而代之呢？

?

So I read loads of stuff about it, and I couldn't really find the answers I was looking for, so I thought, okay, I'll go and sit with different people around the world who lived this and studied this and talk to them and see if I could learn from them. And I didn't realize I would end up going over 30,000 miles at the start, but I ended up going and meeting loads of different people, from a transgender crack dealer in Brownsville, Brooklyn, to a scientist who spends a lot of time feeding hallucinogens to mongooses to see if they like them --

所以我讀了很多關(guān)于它的資料，然而卻無法找到我想要的答案，所以我想，好吧，那就去見見那些世界上各種以此為生的人和研究這些問題的專家，和他們聊聊看是否能夠從他們中找到答案。我一開始沒想到自己最后竟然一走就是30,000多英里，但最終我遇到了很多不同的人，從布魯克林布朗斯維爾的一個變性人DF，到一個花了很多時間給貓鼬喂食迷幻藥的科學(xué)家，看它們是否對此感興趣——

?

it turns out they do, but only in very specific circumstances -- to the only country that's ever decriminalized all drugs, from cannabis to crack, Portugal. And the thing I realized that really blew my mind is, almost everything we think we know about addiction is wrong, and if we start to absorb the new evidence about addiction, I think we're going to have to change a lot more than our drug policies.

結(jié)果是它們確實對此感興趣，但只有在非常特殊的情況下，葡萄牙是唯一一個將所有DP從大麻到DP都合法化的國家。而真正讓我震驚的是，幾乎所有我們認(rèn)為我們知道的關(guān)于上癮的事情都是錯誤的，如果我們開始挖掘關(guān)于上癮的新證據(jù)，我認(rèn)為我們得改變包括DP政策在內(nèi)的許多東西。

?

But let's start with what we think we know, what I thought I knew. Let's think about this middle row here. Imagine all of you, for 20 days now, went off and used heroin three times a day. Some of you look a little more enthusiastic than others at this prospect. (Laughter) Don't worry, it's just a thought experiment. Imagine you did that, right? What would happen?

但讓我們先從我們認(rèn)識的，我之前所以為的開始。讓我們想想這中間一排。想象你們從今天開始的20天，每天吸食海洛因三次。有些人聽到這看起來比較興奮啊。別擔(dān)心，這只是一個假想試驗。想象你那樣做了，對吧？會發(fā)生什么？

?

Now, we have a story about what would happen that we've been told for a century. We think, because there are chemical hooks in heroin, as you took it for a while, your body would become dependent on those hooks, you'd start to physically need them, and at the end of those 20 days, you'd all be heroin addicts. Right? That's what I thought.

這樣的后果——過去的一百年我們都是如此被告知的。我們認(rèn)為，因為海洛因中有化學(xué)致癮劑，當(dāng)你服用一段時間后，你的身體就會對它形成依賴，你開始從生理上需要它，在這20天結(jié)束時，你們所有人都會海洛因上癮。對嗎？我過去也是這么想的。

?

First thing that alerted me to the fact that something's not right with this story is when it was explained to me. If I step out of this TED Talk today and I get hit by a car and I break my hip, I'll be taken to hospital and I'll be given loads of diamorphine. Diamorphine is heroin. It's actually much better heroin than you're going to buy on the streets, because the stuff you buy from a drug dealer is contaminated.

讓我警醒的第一件事是，我們過去一直認(rèn)為的后果其實是錯誤的。如果我今天離開這個TED演講，被車撞到，摔斷了臀部，我會被送到醫(yī)院，然后給我注射大量的二嗎啡。二嗎啡是海洛因。實際上海洛因比你在街上買的要好得多，因為你從DF那里買的東西被污染了。

?

Actually, very little of it is heroin, whereas the stuff you get from the doctor is medically pure. And you'll be given it for quite a long period of time. There are loads of people in this room, you may not realize it, you've taken quite a lot of heroin. And anyone who is watching this anywhere in the world, this is happening.

實際上，只有一小部分是海洛因，而你從醫(yī)生那里得到的東西在醫(yī)學(xué)上是純的。而且你還需要用上很長一段時間。這個房間里有很多人，你可能沒有意識到，你吸食了很多海洛因。屏幕前面的各位也是一樣，這已經(jīng)發(fā)生了。

?

And if what we believe about addiction is right -- those people are exposed to all those chemical hooks -- What should happen? They should become addicts. This has been studied really carefully. It doesn't happen; you will have noticed if your grandmother had a hip replacement, she didn't come out as a junkie. (Laughter

如果我們對上癮的看法是正確的——那些人都暴露在化學(xué)致癮劑前——那會發(fā)生什么呢？他們應(yīng)該成為癮君子。這項研究非常謹(jǐn)慎，你可能意識不到，當(dāng)你的祖母換了一個髖關(guān)節(jié)后就成為了癮君子。

?

And when I learned this, it seemed so weird to me, so contrary to everything I'd been told, everything I thought I knew, I just thought it couldn't be right, until I met a man called Bruce Alexander. He's a professor of psychology in Vancouver who carried out an incredible experiment I think really helps us to understand this issue. Professor Alexander explained to me, the idea of addiction we've all got in our heads, that story, comes partly from a series of experiments that were done earlier in the 20th century.

當(dāng)我知道這件事的時候，我覺得很奇怪，所以和別人告訴我的相反，我認(rèn)為我知道的一切，我只是覺得這不可能是對的，直到我遇到一個叫布魯斯·亞歷山大的人。他是溫哥華的一位心理學(xué)教授，進(jìn)行了一項令人難以置信的實驗，我認(rèn)為這真的有助于我們理解這個問題。亞歷山大教授向我解釋說，我們腦子里都有上癮的想法，這個故事，部分來自20世紀(jì)早期的一系列實驗。

?

They're really simple. You can do them tonight at home if you feel a little sadistic. You get a rat and you put it in a cage, and you give it two water bottles: One is just water, and the other is water laced with either heroin or cocaine. If you do that, the rat will almost always prefer the drug water and almost always kill itself quite quickly. So there you go, right? That's how we think it works. In the '70s, Professor Alexander comes along and he looks at this experiment and he noticed something.

他們真的很簡單。如果你覺得有點虐待狂，今晚你可以在家里試試看。你把一只老鼠放進(jìn)籠子里，給它兩瓶水：一瓶是水，另一瓶是摻有海洛因或可卡因的水。如果你這樣做，老鼠幾乎總是喜歡藥水，而且?guī)缀蹩偸呛芸熳詺ⅰＤ銈兪沁@么想的，對吧？沒錯，我們就是這么認(rèn)為的。在70年代，亞歷山大教授出現(xiàn)了，他看著這個實驗，發(fā)現(xiàn)了一些東西。

?

He said ah, we're putting the rat in an empty cage. It's got nothing to do except use these drugs. Let's try something different. So Professor Alexander built a cage that he called "Rat Park," which is basically heaven for rats. They've got loads of cheese, they've got loads of colored balls, they've got loads of tunnels. Crucially, they've got loads of friends.

他說啊，我們把老鼠關(guān)在一個空籠子里。除了用這些藥沒什么關(guān)系。讓我們試試別的。所以亞歷山大教授建造了一個籠子，他稱之為“老鼠公園”，這基本上是老鼠的天堂。他們有很多奶酪，有很多彩球，有很多隧道。最重要的是，他們有很多朋友。

?

They can have loads of sex. And they've got both the water bottles, the normal water and the drugged water. But here's the fascinating thing: In Rat Park, they don't like the drug water. They almost never use it. None of them ever use it compulsively. None of them ever overdose. You go from almost 100 percent overdose when they're isolated to zero percent overdose when they have happy and connected lives.

方便交配。它們也有兩個杯子，裝著普通的水和有DP的水。但有趣的是：在老鼠公園，它們并不喜歡有DP的水。它們基本上不喝。它們中沒有出現(xiàn)不得不喝的老鼠，也沒有過量服用的。當(dāng)他們被隔離時，百分之百的都過量服用了DP，而當(dāng)它們過著開心并與外界交往的生活時，服用DP的比例是零。

?

Now, when he first saw this, Professor Alexander thought, maybe this is just a thing about rats, they're quite different to us. Maybe not as different as we'd like, but, you know -- But fortunately, there was a human experiment into the exact same principle happening at the exact same time. It was called the Vietnam War.

現(xiàn)在，當(dāng)他第一次看到這個現(xiàn)象的時候，亞歷山大教授想，也許這個只是老鼠的情況，它們和我們很不一樣。也許與我們想象的不同，但是，你知道——恰好，有一個人類實驗，基于同樣的原理在同一時間發(fā)生了。它被稱為越戰(zhàn)。

?

In Vietnam, 20 percent of all American troops were using loads of heroin, and if you look at the news reports from the time, they were really worried, because they thought, my God, we're going to have hundreds of thousands of junkies on the streets of the United States when the war ends; it made total sense. Now, those soldiers who were using loads of heroin were followed home.

在越南，20%的美軍使用大量海洛因，如果你看看當(dāng)時的新聞報道，他們真的很擔(dān)心，因為他們認(rèn)為，天哪，當(dāng)戰(zhàn)爭結(jié)束時，我們會有成千上萬的癮君子在美國的大街上；這完全可能發(fā)生?，F(xiàn)在，那些使用大量海洛因的士兵回家之后被繼續(xù)跟蹤。

?

The Archives of General Psychiatry did a really detailed study, and what happened to them? It turns out they didn't go to rehab. They didn't go into withdrawal. Ninety-five percent of them just stopped. Now, if you believe the story about chemical hooks, that makes absolutely no sense, but Professor Alexander began to think there might be a different story about addiction. He said, what if addiction isn't about your chemical hooks? What if addiction is about your cage? What if addiction is an adaptation to your environment?

《普通精神病學(xué)檔案》做了一個非常詳細(xì)的研究，結(jié)果怎么樣？結(jié)果他們沒有去戒毒所。他們也沒有特意去戒掉毒癮。95%的人就停止XD了?，F(xiàn)在，如果你相信化學(xué)制癮的解釋，這根本講不通，但是亞歷山大教授開始認(rèn)為，也許上癮可以有另一種解釋。他說，如果上癮與化學(xué)制癮物無關(guān)呢？如果上癮是因為你的籠子呢？如果上癮其實是一種對環(huán)境的適應(yīng)呢？

?

Looking at this, there was another professor called Peter Cohen in the Netherlands who said, maybe we shouldn't even call it addiction. Maybe we should call it bonding. Human beings have a natural and innate need to bond, and when we're happy and healthy, we'll bond and connect with each other, but if you can't do that,

看看接下來這個案例，荷蘭另一位叫彼得·科恩的教授說，也許我們甚至不應(yīng)該稱之為上癮。也許我們應(yīng)該稱之為依賴。人類有一種天生的和與生俱來的聯(lián)結(jié)需要，當(dāng)我們幸福健康的時候，我們會彼此聯(lián)結(jié)和聯(lián)系，但如果你做不到這一點，

?

because you're traumatized or isolated or beaten down by life, you will bond with something that will give you some sense of relief. Now, that might be gambling, that might be pornography, that might be cocaine, that might be cannabis, but you will bond and connect with something because that's our nature. That's what we want as human beings.

由于生活的創(chuàng)傷和隔離，你會依賴其他給你安慰的東西?，F(xiàn)在，這可能是DB，可能是SQ，可能是可卡因，可能是大麻，但是你會和一些東西聯(lián)系在一起，因為那是我們的本性。作為人類，這就是我們想要的。

?

And at first, I found this quite a difficult thing to get my head around, but one way that helped me to think about it is, I can see, I've got over by my seat a bottle of water, right? I'm looking at lots of you, and lots of you have bottles of water with you. Forget the drugs. Forget the drug war. Totally legally, all of those bottles of water could be bottles of vodka, right? We could all be getting drunk -- I might after this -- but we're not.

一開始，我很難想通這件事，但有一個讓我理解這件事的方法是，我能看到，我在座位邊喝了一瓶水，對吧？我看著你們很多人，你們很多人帶著水瓶。忘掉毒品吧。忘掉DP戰(zhàn)爭吧。假設(shè)一種合法的情況，所有這些瓶裝水都可能是伏特加，對吧？之后我們可能都會喝醉了，但我們沒有。

?

Now, because you've been able to afford the approximately gazillion pounds that it costs to get into a TED Talk, I'm guessing you guys could afford to be drinking vodka for the next six months. You wouldn't end up homeless. You're not going to do that, and the reason you're not going to do that is not because anyone's stopping you. It's because you've got bonds and connections that you want to be present for. You've got work you love. You've got people you love. You've got healthy relationships. And a core part of addiction, I came to think, and I believe the evidence suggests, is about not being able to bear to be present in your life.

現(xiàn)在，因為你們能負(fù)擔(dān)得起參加TED演講所需的近百萬英鎊的費(fèi)用，我猜你們也能負(fù)擔(dān)得起接下來六個月喝伏特加的費(fèi)用。你不會無家可歸的。你不會那樣做的，你不會那樣做的原因不是因為有人阻止你。這是因為你有你想要展現(xiàn)的紐帶和聯(lián)系。你有你喜歡的工作。你有你愛的人。你有著健康的人際關(guān)系。而上癮的核心，我認(rèn)為，我堅信證據(jù)也在表明，那是對于現(xiàn)實生活的無奈。

?

Now, this has really significant implications. The most obvious implications are for the War on Drugs. In Arizona, I went out with a group of women who were made to wear t-shirts saying, "I was a drug addict," and go out on chain gangs and dig graves while members of the public jeer at them, and when those women get out of prison, they're going to have criminal records that mean they'll never work in the legal economy again.

這對我們有著深遠(yuǎn)的啟發(fā)。最明顯的影響是對DP的戰(zhàn)爭。在亞利桑那州，我和一群婦女一起出去，她們被要求穿著寫有“我是癮君子”的T恤，被鏈子拴著一起挖墳?zāi)?，人們都取笑她們。?dāng)這些婦女出獄時，她們會有犯罪記錄，這意味著她們再也不能從事合法經(jīng)濟(jì)活動。

?

Now, that's a very extreme example, obviously, in the case of the chain gang, but actually almost everywhere in the world we treat addicts to some degree like that. We punish them. We shame them. We give them criminal records. We put barriers between them reconnecting. There was a doctor in Canada, Dr. Gabor Maté, an amazing man, who said to me, if you wanted to design a system that would make addiction worse, you would design that system.

當(dāng)然，被鐵鏈拴在一起使得這個例子有點極端，但事實上，幾乎在世界的任何一個角落，我們在某種程度上都是這樣對待癮君子的。我們懲罰他們。我們讓他們蒙羞。我們給他們記下犯罪記錄。我們在他們重新與外界建立聯(lián)系時施加阻礙。加拿大有個醫(yī)生，加博·馬特博士，一個了不起的人，他對我說，如果你想設(shè)計一個能讓上癮變得更嚴(yán)重的系統(tǒng)，你可以把系統(tǒng)設(shè)計成那樣。

?

Now, there's a place that decided to do the exact opposite, and I went there to see how it worked. In the year 2000, Portugal had one of the worst drug problems in Europe. One percent of the population was addicted to heroin, which is kind of mind-blowing, and every year, they tried the American way more and more. They punished people and stigmatized them and shamed them more, and every year, the problem got worse.

現(xiàn)在，有一個地方?jīng)Q定做完全相反的事情，我去那里看看它是如何運(yùn)作的。2000年，葡萄牙是歐洲D(zhuǎn)P問題最嚴(yán)重的國家之一。百分之一的人沉迷于海洛因，令人震驚，每年他們都嘗試使用更加強(qiáng)硬的美式手段。他們不斷懲罰癮君子，誣蔑并羞辱他們，但是每年這個問題都變得更加嚴(yán)重。

?

And one day, the Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition got together, and basically said, look, we can't go on with a country where we're having ever more people becoming heroin addicts. Let's set up a panel of scientists and doctors to figure out what would genuinely solve the problem. And they set up a panel led by an amazing man called Dr. Jo?o Goul?o, to look at all this new evidence, and they came back and they said, "Decriminalize all drugs from cannabis to crack, but" --

有一天，首相和反對黨領(lǐng)袖聚在一起，大概是說，我們再也不能這樣繼續(xù)下去了，那樣全國會有越來越多的人海洛因上癮。我們需要成立一個由科學(xué)家和醫(yī)生組成的小組，找出真正能解決這個問題的方法。他們建立了一個由約翰·華谷勞博士領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的小組，重新研究這些新證據(jù)，最后他們說 “將DP合法化，不論是大麻還是DP，但是”

?

and this is the crucial next step -- "take all the money we used to spend on cutting addicts off, on disconnecting them, and spend it instead on reconnecting them with society." And that's not really what we think of as drug treatment in the United States and Britain. So they do do residential rehab, they do psychological therapy, that does have some value. But the biggest thing they did was the complete opposite of what we do: a massive program of job creation for addicts, and microloans for addicts to set up small businesses.

--最重要的一點--“撤回我們過去用來對付DY和用來隔離癮君子的費(fèi)用，用這些錢來幫助他們回到社會”這并不是我們認(rèn)為的解決DY的方法，不論是在美國還是英國?！彼运麄儠≡?，做心理治療，那確實起到一定作用。但最重要的事是，那與我們過去做的完全不同：就是為癮君子創(chuàng)立大量就業(yè)機(jī)會，以及為他們建立小企業(yè)提供小額貸款。

?

So say you used to be a mechanic. When you're ready, they'll go to a garage, and they'll say, if you employ this guy for a year, we'll pay half his wages. The goal was to make sure that every addict in Portugal had something to get out of bed for in the morning. And when I went and met the addicts in Portugal, what they said is, as they rediscovered purpose, they rediscovered bonds and relationships with the wider society.

假設(shè)你過去曾是一個機(jī)械工人。當(dāng)你準(zhǔn)備好了后，他們會去你工作的車庫，說：“如果你們雇傭這個人滿一年，他一半的薪水由我們來付?！蔽覀兊哪繕?biāo)是確保葡萄牙的每個癮君子在早上起床之后都有一些事情可做。當(dāng)我去葡萄牙見那些癮君子時，他們說，由于他們重新找到了目標(biāo)，他們也重新找到了與外界社會的依賴和關(guān)系。

?

It'll be 15 years this year since that experiment began, and the results are in: injecting drug use is down in Portugal, according to the British Journal of Criminology, by 50 percent, five-zero percent. Overdose is massively down, HIV is massively down among addicts. Addiction in every study is significantly down. One of the ways you know it's worked so well is that almost nobody in Portugal wants to go back to the old system.

從實驗開始到現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)15年了，結(jié)果是：根據(jù)英國犯罪學(xué)雜志的報道，葡萄牙的注射DP使用率下降了50%，只有0.5%了。過量XD的狀況大量減少，DP導(dǎo)致的艾滋病毒傳播也在減少。每項研究的成癮性都顯著下降。你應(yīng)該也猜得出，它運(yùn)作良好的影響之一就是，在葡萄牙，幾乎沒有人愿意回到戒毒的舊體制。

?

Now, that's the political implications. I actually think there's a layer of implications to all this research below that. We live in a culture where people feel really increasingly vulnerable to all sorts of addictions, whether it's to their smart phones or to shopping or to eating. Before these talks began -- you guys know this -- we were told we weren't allowed to have our smart phones on, and I have to say, a lot of you looked an awful lot like addicts who were told their dealer was going to be unavailable for the next couple of hours.

現(xiàn)在，這是一個ZZ上的影響。不過我又開始思考一個層面的影響，它涉及所有的研究。我們生活在這樣一種文化中，人們越來越容易上癮，無論是對智能手機(jī)、購物還是飲食。在這些演講開始之前——你們都知道——我們被告知關(guān)掉智能手機(jī)，我不得不說，你們中的許多人看看起來很失落，就好像癮君子被告知在接下來的幾個小時都不能見到DF了一樣。

?

A lot of us feel like that, and it might sound weird to say, I've been talking about how disconnection is a major driver of addiction and weird to say it's growing, because you think we're the most connected society that's ever been, surely. But I increasingly began to think that the connections we have or think we have, are like a kind of parody of human connection. If you have a crisis in your life, you'll notice something.

許多人都覺得，說起來可能有點奇怪，我一直說與外界的失聯(lián)是導(dǎo)致上癮的主要因素，非常奇怪的是這種現(xiàn)象正在增長，因為我們都以為自己正處于聯(lián)系最緊密的社會，那是肯定的。但我卻越發(fā)覺得，我們擁有或認(rèn)為我們擁有的關(guān)系，就像是對人際關(guān)系的一種拙劣的模仿。如果你在生活中遭遇了危機(jī)，你總會注意到一些事情。

?

It won't be your Twitter followers who come to sit with you. It won't be your Facebook friends who help you turn it round. It'll be your flesh and blood friends who you have deep and nuanced and textured, face-to-face relationships with, and there's a study I learned about from Bill McKibben, the environmental writer, that I think tells us a lot about this.

你推特上的粉絲不會與你并肩作戰(zhàn)。你臉書上的伙伴不會幫你走出困境。只有你血肉相連的朋友，那些與你關(guān)系很深、體貼入微、并且能面對面的朋友才會來幫你，我還從環(huán)境作家比爾·麥克那里了解到的一個研究，它告訴了我們很多相關(guān)的道理。

?

It looked at the number of close friends the average American believes they can call on in a crisis. That number has been declining steadily since the 1950s. The amount of floor space an individual has in their home has been steadily increasing, and I think that's like a metaphor for the choice we've made as a culture. We've traded floor space for friends, we've traded stuff for connections, and the result is we are one of the loneliest societies there has ever been.

這個研究調(diào)查了米國人平均擁有的在危急時可以電話求助的親密朋友的數(shù)量。這一數(shù)字自20世紀(jì)50年代以來一直在穩(wěn)步下降，而每個人在家里的空間卻一直穩(wěn)定地增長，我認(rèn)為這種心照不宣的選擇已經(jīng)成了一種流行文化。我們拿朋友交換房屋面積，拿聯(lián)系交換物品，結(jié)果就是我們成了有史以來最孤獨(dú)的社會之一。

?

And Bruce Alexander, the guy who did the Rat Park experiment, says, we talk all the time in addiction about individual recovery, and it's right to talk about that, but we need to talk much more about social recovery. Something's gone wrong with us, not just with individuals but as a group, and we've created a society where, for a lot of us, life looks a whole lot more like that isolated cage and a whole lot less like Rat Park.

那個做了老鼠公園實驗的布魯斯·亞歷山大說，我們一直在討論個人層面的上癮恢復(fù)，這個是對的，但我們更應(yīng)該討論社會層面上的恢復(fù)。我們出了點問題，不僅僅是個人的問題，而是作為一個群體的問題，我們創(chuàng)造了一個社會，對我們很多人來說，生活看起來更像是一個孤立的籠子，它還遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不如老鼠公園。

?

If I'm honest, this isn't why I went into it. I didn't go in to the discover the political stuff, the social stuff. I wanted to know how to help the people I love. And when I came back from this long journey and I'd learned all this, I looked at the addicts in my life, and if you're really candid, it's hard loving an addict, and there's going to be lots of people who know in this room. You are angry a lot of the time, and I think one of the reasons why this debate is so charged is because it runs through the heart of each of us, right?

如果我說實話，這并不是我深入調(diào)查這些的原因。我當(dāng)時并未想去探索這些ZZ和社會相關(guān)的問題，我只是想知道如何幫助我愛的人。而當(dāng)我結(jié)束了這段漫長的旅程，我卻學(xué)到了這么多，我看著我生命中的那些癮君子，坦率地說，愛一個上癮者很困難，正如很多人知道的那樣。你會經(jīng)常生氣，我想這場辯論之所以如此激烈的原因之一是因為它貫穿了我們每個人的內(nèi)心，對吧？

?

Everyone has a bit of them that looks at an addict and thinks, I wish someone would just stop you. And the kind of scripts we're told for how to deal with the addicts in our lives is typified by, I think, the reality show "Intervention," if you guys have ever seen it. I think everything in our lives is defined by reality TV, but that's another TED Talk. If you've ever seen the show "Intervention," it's a pretty simple premise.

每一個多少都有試過看著某個上癮的人想，我希望有人可以阻止你。我們被告知對待生活中上癮者的辦法，我想，典型的例子是真人秀“干預(yù)”，不知你們看過沒有。我認(rèn)為生活中任何事都能在真人秀中反映出來，但那是另一個TED話題了。如果你看過這個節(jié)目“干預(yù)”，這是一個很簡單的假定。

?

Get an addict, all the people in their life, gather them together, confront them with what they're doing, and they say, if you don't shape up, we're going to cut you off. So what they do is they take the connection to the addict, and they threaten it, they make it contingent on the addict behaving the way they want. And I began to think, I began to see why that approach doesn't work, and I began to think that's almost like the importing of the logic of the Drug War into our private lives.

找到一個癮君子，以及他們生活中的所有人，把他們聚集在一起，就他上癮的事情對他說，如果你不振作起來，我們就疏離你。所以他們所做的就是把他們和癮君子聯(lián)系起來，威脅他們，結(jié)果取決于上癮者會不會按他們所想的去做。我開始思考，也漸漸意識到為什么這種方法不起作用，我想這就好像是將DP戰(zhàn)爭中的邏輯引入到我們的私人生活中來。

?

So I was thinking, how could I be Portuguese? And what I've tried to do now, and I can't tell you I do it consistently and I can't tell you it's easy, is to say to the addicts in my life that I want to deepen the connection with them, to say to them, I love you whether you're using or you're not. I love you, whatever state you're in, and if you need me, I'll come and sit with you because I love you and I don't want you to be alone or to feel alone.

我當(dāng)時想，我如何才能像葡萄牙人那么做？如今我已嘗試過的，雖然不能說堅持得很好，因為這一點也不簡單，那就是我會對生活中的癮君子說，我想加深與他們的聯(lián)系，我告訴他們，不管你是否還有DY，我都愛你。我愛你，無論你處于什么樣的狀態(tài)，如果你需要我，我可以隨時來到你身邊，因為我愛你，所以不希望你獨(dú)自一人或是感到孤單。

?

And I think the core of that message -- you're not alone, we love you -- has to be at every level of how we respond to addicts, socially, politically and individually. For 100 years now, we've been singing war songs about addicts. I think all along we should have been singing love songs to them, because the opposite of addiction is not sobriety. The opposite of addiction is connection.

Thank you.

我認(rèn)為這條啟示的核心就是——你不是一個人，我們愛你——必須沉穩(wěn)我們在社會、政治和個人層面上對癮君子的態(tài)度。100年來，我們一直在唱著關(guān)于癮君子的戰(zhàn)歌。我想我們應(yīng)該一直唱情歌給他們聽，因為上癮的反面是不清醒。上癮的反面是聯(lián)系。謝謝大家。