你的話可以預(yù)測你未來的心理健康

Your words may predict your future mental health

演講者：Mariano Sigman

?

We have historical records that allow us to know how the ancient Greeks dressed,?how they lived,?how they fought ...?but how did they think?

我們有歷史記錄，可以讓我們 要知道古希臘人的穿著，他們?nèi)绾紊睿?/span>他們?nèi)绾螒?zhàn)斗......?但是他們是怎么想的呢？

?

One natural idea is that the deepest aspects of human thought --?our ability to imagine,?to be conscious,?to dream --?have always been the same.?Another possibility?is that the social transformations that have shaped our culture?may have also changed the structural columns of human thought.

一個自然的想法是，最深的 人類思想的各個方面——我們想象、有意識、做夢的能力——總是相同的。?另一種可能性是社會轉(zhuǎn)型 塑造了我們的文化可能也發(fā)生了變化 人類思想的結(jié)構(gòu)柱。

?

We may all have different opinions about this.?Actually, it's a long-standing philosophical debate.?But is this question even amenable to science?

我們可能都有不同的 對此的看法。?實際上，這是一個由來已久的 哲學(xué)辯論。?但這個問題是嗎 甚至適合科學(xué)？

?

Here I'd like to propose?that in the same way we can reconstruct how the ancient Greek cities looked?just based on a few bricks,?that the writings of a culture are the archaeological records,?the fossils, of human thought.

在這里，我想提出，以同樣的方式我們可以重建 古希臘城市的外觀僅基于幾塊磚，即一種文化的著作 是人類思想的考古記錄，化石。

?

footnote

footnote

And in fact,?doing some form of psychological analysis?of some of the most ancient books of human culture,?Julian Jaynes came up in the '70s with a very wild and radical hypothesis:?that only 3,000 years ago,?humans were what today we would call schizophrenics.?And he made this claim?based on the fact that the first humans described in these books?behaved consistently,?in different traditions and in different places of the world,?as if they were hearing and obeying voices?that they perceived as coming from the Gods,?or from the muses ...?what today we would call hallucinations.?And only then, as time went on,?they began to recognize that they were the creators,?the owners of these inner voices.?And with this, they gained introspection:?the ability to think about their own thoughts.

事實上，對一些最古老的人進(jìn)行某種形式的心理分析?人類文化書籍，朱利安·杰恩斯（Julian Jaynes）在70年代問世 有一個非常瘋狂和激進(jìn)的假設(shè)：僅在 3，000 年前，人類就是今天的樣子 我們稱之為精神分裂癥患者。?他提出這一主張是基于這樣一個事實，即第一個 這些書中描述的人類在不同的傳統(tǒng)中表現(xiàn)一致?在世界不同的地方，仿佛他們聽到并服從他們所感知的聲音 來自眾神，或來自繆斯...?今天我們稱之為幻覺。?直到那時，隨著時間的推移，他們才開始認(rèn)識到 他們是創(chuàng)造者，是這些內(nèi)心聲音的所有者。?有了這個，他們獲得了內(nèi)?。?/span>思考的能力 關(guān)于他們自己的想法。

?

So Jaynes's theory is that consciousness,?at least in the way we perceive it today,?where we feel that we are the pilots of our own existence --?is a quite recent cultural development.?And this theory is quite spectacular,?but it has an obvious problem?which is that it's built on just a few and very specific examples.?So the question is whether the theory?that introspection built up in human history only about 3,000 years ago?can be examined in a quantitative and objective manner.

所以杰恩斯的理論是意識，至少在我們今天感知它的方式中，我們覺得我們是飛行員。 我們自己的存在 -?是一個相當(dāng)新的文化發(fā)展。?這個理論非常壯觀，但它有一個明顯的問題，那就是它只建立在幾個基礎(chǔ)上。 和非常具體的例子。?所以問題是，內(nèi)省是否在人類身上建立起來的理論。 只有大約3年前的歷史可以用定量來檢驗 和客觀的態(tài)度。

?

And the problem of how to go about this is quite obvious.?It's not like Plato woke up one day and then he wrote,?"Hello, I'm Plato,?and as of today, I have a fully introspective consciousness."

以及如何的問題 這樣做是很明顯的。?不像柏拉圖有一天醒來 然后他寫道：“你好，我是柏拉圖，截至今天，我有 一個完全內(nèi)省的意識。

?

And this tells us actually what is the essence of the problem.?We need to find the emergence of a concept that's never said.?The word introspection does not appear a single time?in the books we want to analyze.

這實際上告訴我們 問題的本質(zhì)是什么。?我們需要找到出現(xiàn) 一個從未說過的概念。?內(nèi)省這個詞 在我們想要分析的書中沒有出現(xiàn)過一次。

?

So our way to solve this is to build the space of words.?This is a huge space that contains all words?in such a way that the distance between any two of them?is indicative of how closely related they are.?So for instance,?you want the words "dog" and "cat" to be very close together,?but the words "grapefruit" and "logarithm" to be very far away.?And this has to be true for any two words within the space.

所以我們解決這個問題的方法 就是構(gòu)建文字的空間。?這是一個巨大的空間 以這樣的方式包含所有單詞 在它們中的任何兩個之間都表明如何 它們密切相關(guān)。?例如，你想要“狗”和“貓”這兩個詞 靠得很近，但“葡萄柚”和“對數(shù)”這兩個詞 離得很遠(yuǎn)。?這必須是真的 對于空間內(nèi)的任意兩個單詞。

?

footnote

footnote

And there are different ways that we can construct the space of words.?One is just asking the experts,?a bit like we do with dictionaries.?Another possibility?is following the simple assumption that when two words are related,?they tend to appear in the same sentences,?in the same paragraphs,?in the same documents,?more often than would be expected just by pure chance.?And this simple hypothesis,?this simple method,?with some computational tricks?that have to do with the fact?that this is a very complex and high-dimensional space,?turns out to be quite effective.

并且有不同的方式 我們可以構(gòu)建單詞的空間。?一個是詢問專家，有點像我們對字典所做的。?另一種可能性是遵循簡單的假設(shè) 當(dāng)兩個單詞相關(guān)時，它們往往出現(xiàn)在相同的句子、相同的段落、相同的文檔中，比預(yù)期的更頻繁 純屬偶然。?這個簡單的假設(shè)，這個簡單的方法，有一些計算技巧，與這是一個非常復(fù)雜的事實有關(guān)。?和高維空間，結(jié)果證明是相當(dāng)有效的。

?

And just to give you a flavor of how well this works,?this is the result we get when we analyze this for some familiar words.?And you can see first?that words automatically organize into semantic neighborhoods.?So you get the fruits, the body parts,?the computer parts, the scientific terms and so on.

只是為了給你一個味道 這有多好，這是我們在 我們分析一些熟悉的詞。?你首先可以看到單詞會自動組織 進(jìn)入語義鄰域。?所以你得到水果，身體部位，電腦部位， 科學(xué)術(shù)語等等。

?

footnote

footnote

The algorithm also identifies that we organize concepts in a hierarchy.?So for instance,?you can see that the scientific terms break down into two subcategories?of the astronomic and the physics terms.?And then there are very fine things.?For instance, the word astronomy,?which seems a bit bizarre where it is,?is actually exactly where it should be,?between what it is,?an actual science,?and between what it describes,?the astronomical terms.

該算法還可以識別 我們在層次結(jié)構(gòu)中組織概念。?例如，您可以看到科學(xué)術(shù)語 分為天文學(xué)和物理學(xué)術(shù)語的兩個子類別。?然后有非常精細(xì)的東西。?例如，天文學(xué)這個詞，它的位置似乎有點奇怪，實際上正是它應(yīng)該在的地方，介于它是什么，一門真正的科學(xué)，以及它所描述的天文學(xué)術(shù)語之間。

?

And we could go on and on with this.?Actually, if you stare at this for a while,?and you just build random trajectories,?you will see that it actually feels a bit like doing poetry.?And this is because, in a way,?walking in this space is like walking in the mind.

我們可以繼續(xù)這樣做。?其實，如果你盯著看 在一段時間內(nèi)，你只是建立隨機(jī)軌跡，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)它實際上感覺 有點像做詩。?這是因為，在某種程度上，在這個空間里行走。 就像在腦海中行走一樣。

?

And the last thing?is that this algorithm also identifies what are our intuitions,?of which words should lead in the neighborhood of introspection.?So for instance,?words such as "self," "guilt," "reason," "emotion,"?are very close to "introspection,"?but other words,?such as "red," "football," "candle," "banana,"?are just very far away.

最后一件事是，該算法還可以識別 我們的直覺是什么，哪些詞應(yīng)該引導(dǎo) 在內(nèi)省的附近。?例如，諸如“自我”，“內(nèi)疚”之類的詞， “理性”、“情感”非常接近“內(nèi)省”，但其他詞，如“紅色”、“足球”， “蠟燭”、“香蕉”就在很遠(yuǎn)的地方。

?

And so once we've built the space,?the question of the history of introspection,?or of the history of any concept?which before could seem abstract and somehow vague,?becomes concrete --?becomes amenable to quantitative science.

因此，一旦我們建立了空間，歷史問題就出現(xiàn)了。 內(nèi)省，或任何以前可能看起來很抽象的概念的歷史 不知何故模糊，變得具體——變得適合定量科學(xué)。

?

?

All that we have to do is take the books,?we digitize them,?and we take this stream of words as a trajectory?and project them into the space,?and then we ask whether this trajectory spends significant time?circling closely to the concept of introspection.

我們所要做的就是拿起書，我們把它們數(shù)字化，然后我們拿這個流。 單詞作為軌跡并將它們投射到空間中，然后我們問這個軌跡是否 花費(fèi)大量時間緊緊圍繞概念 的內(nèi)省。

?

?

And with this,?we could analyze the history of introspection?in the ancient Greek tradition,?for which we have the best available written record.?So what we did is we took all the books --?we just ordered them by time --?for each book we take the words?and we project them to the space,?and then we ask for each word how close it is to introspection,?and we just average that.?And then we ask whether, as time goes on and on,?these books get closer, and closer and closer?to the concept of introspection.

有了這個，我們可以分析?古希臘傳統(tǒng)中的內(nèi)省歷史，我們擁有最好的 可用的書面記錄。?所以我們做的是把所有的書都拿來—— 我們只是按時間排序——?對于每本書，我們把單詞投射到空間里，然后我們要求每個單詞。 它與內(nèi)省有多接近，我們只是平均這一點。?然后我們問， 隨著時間的流逝，這些書越來越近， 越來越接近內(nèi)省的概念。

?

And this is exactly what happens in the ancient Greek tradition.?So you can see that for the oldest books in the Homeric tradition,?there is a small increase with books getting closer to introspection.?But about four centuries before Christ,?this starts ramping up very rapidly to an almost five-fold increase?of books getting closer, and closer and closer?to the concept of introspection.?And one of the nice things about this?is that now we can ask?whether this is also true in a different, independent tradition.

這正是發(fā)生的事情 在古希臘傳統(tǒng)中。?所以你可以看到最古老的書 在荷馬傳統(tǒng)中，書籍略有增加 越來越接近內(nèi)省。?但是在基督之前大約四個世紀(jì)，這種情況開始迅速增加。 近五倍的書籍越來越近， 越來越接近內(nèi)省的概念。?這樣做的好處之一是，現(xiàn)在我們可以問這是否也是真的。 在一個不同的、獨(dú)立的傳統(tǒng)中。

?

?

footnote

footnote

So we just ran this same analysis on the Judeo-Christian tradition,?and we got virtually the same pattern.?Again, you see a small increase for the oldest books in the Old Testament,?and then it increases much more rapidly?in the new books of the New Testament.?And then we get the peak of introspection?in "The Confessions of Saint Augustine,"?about four centuries after Christ.?And this was very important,?because Saint Augustine had been recognized by scholars,?philologists, historians,?as one of the founders of introspection.?Actually, some believe him to be the father of modern psychology.

所以我們剛剛進(jìn)行了同樣的分析 在猶太教-基督教傳統(tǒng)上，我們得到了幾乎相同的模式。?同樣，您會看到小幅增加 對于舊約中最古老的書卷，然后在新約的新書中增長得更快。?然后我們在“圣奧古斯丁的懺悔”中達(dá)到了內(nèi)省的頂峰，大約在基督之后四個世紀(jì)。?這非常重要，因為圣奧古斯丁 被學(xué)者、語言學(xué)家、歷史學(xué)家公認(rèn)為內(nèi)省的奠基人之一。?實際上，有些人認(rèn)為他是 現(xiàn)代心理學(xué)之父。

?

?

So our algorithm,?which has the virtue of being quantitative,?of being objective,?and of course of being extremely fast --?it just runs in a fraction of a second --?can capture some of the most important conclusions?of this long tradition of investigation.?And this is in a way one of the beauties of science,?which is that now this idea can be translated?and generalized to a whole lot of different domains.

所以我們的算法，它有優(yōu)點 定量的，客觀的，當(dāng)然還有極快的——它只是在幾分之一秒內(nèi)運(yùn)行——可以捕捉到一些最?這一悠久的調(diào)查傳統(tǒng)的重要結(jié)論。?這在某種程度上是 科學(xué)的美妙之處之一，就是現(xiàn)在這個想法 可以翻譯和概括為很多 不同的領(lǐng)域。

?

So in the same way that we asked about the past of human consciousness,?maybe the most challenging question we can pose to ourselves?is whether this can tell us something about the future of our own consciousness.?To put it more precisely,?whether the words we say today?can tell us something of where our minds will be in a few days,?in a few months?or a few years from now.

所以就像我們問的那樣 關(guān)于人類意識的過去，也許是最具挑戰(zhàn)性的問題 我們可以對自己提出，這是否可以告訴我們一些事情 關(guān)于我們自己意識的未來。?更準(zhǔn)確地說，我們今天說的話是否能告訴我們一些事情 幾天后、幾個月或幾年后我們的思想將在哪里?。

?

And in the same way many of us are now wearing sensors?that detect our heart rate,?our respiration,?our genes,?on the hopes that this may help us prevent diseases,?we can ask whether monitoring and analyzing the words we speak,?we tweet, we email, we write,?can tell us ahead of time whether something may go wrong with our minds.?And with Guillermo Cecchi,?who has been my brother in this adventure,?we took on this task.?And we did so by analyzing the recorded speech of 34 young people?who were at a high risk of developing schizophrenia.

以同樣的方式，我們中的許多人 現(xiàn)在戴著傳感器來檢測我們的心率、呼吸、基因，希望這可能會 幫助我們預(yù)防疾病，我們可以問是否監(jiān)測 分析我們說的話，我們發(fā)推文，我們發(fā)電子郵件，我們寫，可以提前告訴我們是否 我們的思想可能會出問題。?吉列爾莫·切奇（Guillermo Cecchi）是我在這次冒險中的兄弟，我們承擔(dān)了這項任務(wù)。?我們通過分析 34名處于高風(fēng)險中的年輕人的錄音演講 發(fā)展中的精神分裂癥。

?

?

And so what we did is, we measured speech at day one,?and then we asked whether the properties of the speech could predict,?within a window of almost three years,?the future development of psychosis.?But despite our hopes,?we got failure after failure.?There was just not enough information in semantics?to predict the future organization of the mind.?It was good enough?to distinguish between a group of schizophrenics and a control group,?a bit like we had done for the ancient texts,?but not to predict the future onset of psychosis.

所以我們所做的是， 我們在第一天測量了語音，然后我們詢問屬性是否 的演講可以預(yù)測，在近三年的窗口內(nèi)，精神病的未來發(fā)展。?但是，盡管我們抱有希望，我們還是一次又一次地失敗。?只是不夠 預(yù)測未來的語義學(xué)信息?心靈的組織。?區(qū)分一個群體就足夠了?精神分裂癥患者和對照組，有點像我們所做的那樣 對于古代文本，但不預(yù)測未來 精神病發(fā)作。

?

But then we realized?that maybe the most important thing was not so much what they were saying,?but how they were saying it.?More specifically,?it was not in which semantic neighborhoods the words were,?but how far and fast they jumped?from one semantic neighborhood to the other one.?And so we came up with this measure,?which we termed semantic coherence,?which essentially measures the persistence of speech within one semantic topic,?within one semantic category.

但后來我們意識到，也許是最重要的事情 與其說他們在說什么，不如說他們怎么說。?更具體地說，它不是在哪個語義 這些詞是鄰里，但它們從一個語義鄰域跳得有多遠(yuǎn)和多快?到另一個。?所以我們提出了這個度量，我們稱之為語義連貫性，它基本上測量持久性。?一個語義主題內(nèi)的語音，一個語義類別內(nèi)的語音。

?

?

And it turned out to be that for this group of 34 people,?the algorithm based on semantic coherence could predict,?with 100 percent accuracy,?who developed psychosis and who will not.?And this was something that could not be achieved --?not even close --?with all the other existing clinical measures.

結(jié)果是 對于這組34人，基于語義的算法 連貫性可以100%準(zhǔn)確地預(yù)測誰患上了精神病，誰不會。?這是一件事情 這是無法實現(xiàn)的?-?甚至無法接近 -?與所有其他 現(xiàn)有的臨床措施。

?

?

footnote

footnote

And I remember vividly, while I was working on this,?I was sitting at my computer?and I saw a bunch of tweets by Polo --?Polo had been my first student back in Buenos Aires,?and at the time he was living in New York.?And there was something in this tweets --?I could not tell exactly what because nothing was said explicitly --?but I got this strong hunch,?this strong intuition, that something was going wrong.?So I picked up the phone, and I called Polo,?and in fact he was not feeling well.?And this simple fact,?that reading in between the lines,?I could sense, through words, his feelings,?was a simple, but very effective way to help.

我清楚地記得， 當(dāng)我在做這件事的時候，我坐在電腦前，我看到了一堆波羅的推文——波羅是我的第一個學(xué)生。 回到布宜諾斯艾利斯，當(dāng)時 他住在紐約。?這條推文中有一些東西 -?我無法確切地說出是什么 因為什么都沒有明確地說出來——但我有這種強(qiáng)烈的預(yù)感，這種強(qiáng)烈的直覺， 出事了。?于是我拿起電話， 我打電話給波羅，事實上他感覺不舒服。?這個簡單的事實，在字里行間閱讀，我能感覺到， 通過言語，他的感受，很簡單，但非常 有效的幫助方式。

?

?

What I tell you today?is that we're getting close to understanding?how we can convert this intuition that we all have,?that we all share,?into an algorithm.?And in doing so,?we may be seeing in the future a very different form of mental health,?based on objective, quantitative and automated analysis?of the words we write,?of the words we say.

我今天告訴你的是，我們正在得到 接近于理解我們?nèi)绾无D(zhuǎn)換這種直覺 我們都有，我們都分享，變成一個算法。?在這樣做的過程中，我們可能會在未來看到 一種非常不同的心理健康形式，基于客觀、定量 并自動分析我們寫的單詞，我們說的話。

?

Gracias.

謝謝。

?

?

?

?

?

?

?