快捷搜索: 紐約時報  抗疫  疫情  經濟學人  武漢  中國 

從“多重性”中了解尊重和身份

  Human beings are self-conscious creatures:we can conceptualise ourselves as psychological beings,forming beliefs about who and what we are.We also have identities:self-beliefs that are sources of meaning,purpose and value,and that help to constrain our choices and actions.

  人類是有意識的生物:我們能將自己概念化為心理生物,形成關于我們是誰和我們是什么的信念。我們也有身份:自我信念是意義、目的和價值的源泉,其幫助限制我們的選擇和行為。

  In addition to being able to think about ourselves,self-conscious beings can recognise that we are the objects of other people's thoughts.This opens up the possibility of a conflict between our own identities and how we are perceived by others.This potential for conflict gives us unique power over each other,and also makes us uniquely vulnerable:only self-conscious beings can kill with a glance or die of embarrassment.

  除了能夠思考我們自己以外,有自我意識的人能夠知道的是,我們是他人思維的對象。這開啟了我們自己的身份與他人如何看我們之間發生沖突的可能性。這潛在的沖突給了我們彼此特殊的權利,也使得我們尤其容易受傷:只有具備自我意識的人形成才能用一瞥即殺或死于尷尬。

  Our vulnerability to how others regard us might create obligations to try to regard others in some of the ways they desire–ways that are consonant with their own identities.But what about identities that we think are false or absurd–or that we simply don't understand?

  我們對他人如何看待我們的這種脆弱性可能會導致我們有義務試圖以他們所希望的方式來看待他人——這種方法與他們的身份有異曲同工之妙。但那些我們認為是虛無縹緲的身份呢——或者我們根本不能理解的身份呢?

  多重性就是人類所描述事物的模樣

  A plural is a human being who says things like:‘I'm one of many people inside my head.'Although they are quite rare(it's impossible to say how rare),plurals are increasingly visible on social media and in the occasional popular media article.At present,there is a handbook online about how to respond to a co-worker's‘coming out'(as the document puts it)as plural.

  多重性就是人類所描述事物的模樣:“在我腦海里,我是多數人的其中一個。”盡管它們相當罕見(不可能說出是多么罕見),多重性在社交媒體和偶爾流行的媒體文章中越來越明顯。目前,網上有一本關于如何回應同事“出柜”的手冊(就如文章中所說的),這便是多重性。

  You might think you've heard of plurals if you've heard of dissociative identity disorder(DID),because,like plurals,people with DID experience themselves as being psychologically multiple.But many plurals don't meet the diagnostic criteria for DID.Often,this is because they don't find their plurality per se to be distressing or impairing.In other cases,it's because they don't meet the amnesia criterion for DID,since the multiple beings that plurals experience as being inside them can share experiences or communicate to each other about their experiences.Conversely,most people with DID aren't plurals.Plurals don't just feel as though they are psychologically multiple–they believe that they are.And they take each of these psychological beings,inhabiting one shared body,to be a full person:let's call each of them a personp,where the little‘p'stands for‘part of one human being'.As one personp puts it:‘You presume that there's a“real person”underneath all of us who's conjuring up“imaginary friends”.No,we're just people,thanks.'

  如果你聽說過人格分裂(DID),那么你可能想到你聽說過多重人格,因為,就像多重性一樣,有人格分裂的人他們就像是心理上的多重性。但許多多重性人格并不是人格分裂的診斷標準。這往往是因為他們沒有發現他們的多重性是痛苦且受到削弱的。在其他情況下,這是因為他們達到人格分裂的健忘癥標準,由于多重人格所擁有的多重人格經驗在他們內部可彼此進行分享交流經驗或者溝通他們的經驗。相反,大部分有多重人格的人并不具備多重性。多重性并不僅僅像是心理上的多重人格——他們認為他們是這樣的。還有,他們將這些寄居于同一個身體的每一個心理人格都視為完整的人:讓我們將它們每一個稱之為p人,其中的小“p”代表“一個人的一部分”。正如其中一個p人所說的:“你假設我們下面都有一個‘真實的人’在召喚‘想象中的朋友’。”不是的,我們只是普通人罷了,謝謝。

  According to plurals,then,a plural human being isn't a person,but a co-embodied group of people.Each personp takes him or herself to bear social relations to the others,as members of a household might.Different peoplep might speak of liking or disliking,respecting and disparaging,cooperating and arguing and negotiating with each other.

  那么,根據多重性的特點,一個擁有多重性的人不是確切的一個人,而是一個能同時體現群體的人。每個人都會像是一個家庭成員所能做的那樣,帶著他(她)自己去承受與他人的社會關系。不同人可能會對彼此說出喜歡或不喜歡,尊重或不尊重,合作和辯論還有談判。

  The most striking feature of plurals is that they don't say things such as:‘I am many peoplep.'Rather,they might say,as one personp put it in an open letter:

  多重性最突出的特點是,他們不會說像“我是很多p人”這樣的話。相反的,他們可能會說,就像一個p人在一封公眾信中所提到的那樣:

  I am only myself;I have one identity,one sense of self,one personality.Although I am conjoined inseparably from the other members of my group…phrases like‘your other selves',or‘when you were that other person',or‘the other you'…[are]non-sequiturs.I don't have‘other selves'.I am never anyone but myself.

  我只是我自己;我有一個身份,一種自我意識,一種人格。盡管我與我小組的其他成員是不可分割地結合在一起的......像“你的另一個自我”,或“當你是另一個人時”,或是“另一個你”這樣的話語......都是不合理的。我沒有“其他自我”。我就是自己,不是其他人。

  多重性是由我稱之為復數恒等式所定義的

  Plurals are defined by what I will call their plural identities.These plural identities can be difficult for singlets(including me)to wrap our heads around.Singlets experience ourselves as being‘alone in'our bodies,and our strong default assumption is that all people come,one per body,in this way.Meanwhile,plurals'grounds for distinguishing between different peoplep seem to be essentially first-personal and phenomenological–that is,based on their own private experiences.They deny that different peoplep need to be unaware of each other personp's thoughts and experiences,or necessarily have radically different characters.Instead,plurals'grounds for distinguishing between peoplep seem to be that each personp has his or her own sense of self and agency.

  多重性是由我稱之為復數恒等式所定義的。這些復數恒等式對于單身漢(包括我)來說可能不好理解。獨立自我的人認為自己在我們的身體里是“孤獨的”,我們強烈的默認假設是所有人都是這樣來的,一個人就一個身體。同時,多重性在不同人間的區分理由似乎本質上首先是個人和現象學的——也就是說,基于他們自己的個人經歷。他們不承認不同人不需要知道彼此p人的思維和經歷,或者必然有截然不同的性格。相反,多重性在不同人間的區分理由似乎是每個人都有自己的自我意識和能動性。

  The discontinuities that mark the boundaries of peoplep,in other words,aren't bodily;nor are they psychological attributes that can be observed from the outside,like differences in memory and personality.This is a challenge for understanding the plural identity claim,on two levels:one,because we can't access other people's experiences just in general;and two,because singlets don't have these same types of experiences.(A singlet will,of course,experience another human being's actions as not mine–but that person's body will also be visibly distinct.)

  換言之,區分p人的界限的不連續性不是來自身體上的;也不是能夠從外部觀察到的心理屬性,比如記憶和個性的差異。這是一個從兩個層面上理解多重身份訴求的挑戰:一是因為我們通常不能獲取到他人的經歷;二是因為單身者沒有這些同樣類型的經歷。(當然,一個只有一個自我的人將經歷另一個人的行為,而不是我的行為——但那個人的身體也會有明顯的不同。)

  In light of these obstacles to understanding the plural identity claim,it would be natural to hope that plurals mean the claim metaphorically.After all,there are many familiar metaphors involving something like multiple selfhood:I'm someone else when I'm with her;I don't identify with who I was then;What I said before–that was my father speaking.The problem is that plurals explicitly reject these metaphors as not what they mean.As one personp puts it:

  鑒于理解這些多重身份訴求的這些阻礙,自然希望從隱喻的角度上來表示該訴求。畢竟。有很多類似的隱喻涉及到多重自我:我和她在一起時我是另一個人,那么我不認同當時的我;我之前所說的話——那是我父親說的。問題是,多重性明確否認了這些隱喻,因為它們沒有任何意義。正如p人所說的:

  It's completely true that people express different sides of themselves according to different contexts.However,this is different from multiplicity.Members of a multiple group will individually experience themselves as having these‘different sides',just like everyone else.

  人們根據不同語境表達自己不同的一面是完全真實的。然而,多重性則是有所不同的。一個多樣化群體的成員將會像他人一樣,各自體驗他們自己所擁有的這些“不同的方面”。

  Even if the plural identity claim must be metaphorical somehow,it's not clear what it could be a metaphor for.

  盡管多重身份訴求必須有一定的隱喻性,但仍不清楚它是用來比喻什么。

  Our identities matter to us.It also generally matters to us that other people respect those identities.But one might wonder whether it's possible to respect an identity claim that one doesn't believe,or perhaps even understand.

  我們的身份對我們至關重要。他人尊重這些身份對我們來說也很重要。但人們可能想知道,尊重一個連自己都不相信,或許甚至不理解的身份訴求是否是可能的。

  There are identities that we shouldn't respect,because they reinforce unjust social arrangements(say,‘patriarch').But plurals'identities aren't like this,and they evidently help plurals make sense of their experiences.
紐約時報中英文網 www.244129.buzz


  有些身份我們不該尊重,因為它們強化了不公正的社會安排(比如說“家長”)。但多重身份并不像這樣的,它們顯然有助于具備多重性的人理解他們的經歷。

  Some might say that we shouldn't respect identities that are delusional,whether or not they're harmful.But even if this were true,plurals don't seem to be deluded,exactly,since they realise that they can't provide singlets with any observable evidence that peoplep exist.As one personp writes:

  有人可能認為,不管它們是否有害,我們都不該尊重那些妄想的身份。但即使假設這是真實的,多重性似乎從不會受到欺騙,確切地說,因為它們意識到他們不能提供獨立自我的人任何能察覺的證據來證實p人的存在。正如有個人寫道:

  I don't bother[engaging with skeptics]…because the experience is subjective and cannot be tested,all that I could say would be that I have experienced something that was real to me;I can do nothing tangible to convince anyone that I'm not alone in here.

  我不會打擾(困在懷疑論中的人)......因為這個經歷是主觀且不能夠檢測的,我所能說的是,我已經經歷了一些對我而言真實的情況;我無法做任何具體的事情其去說服他人,我在這里并不是形單影只。

  Someone else might protest that we can't be obliged to believe,or even try to believe,identity claims that strike us as absurd or simply wrong.But respecting plural identities doesn't require us to believe them.What it does require,at a minimum,is not correcting plurals when they act on the basis of their self-image,and not treating their plural identities dismissively.It also requires that singlets not engage with plurals for the purpose of persuading them that they're wrong.

  有些人可能會反對說,我們沒有義務去相信,或甚至試圖去相信那些讓我們覺得荒謬或完全錯誤的身份訴求。但尊重多重身份并不是要我們去相信它們。它所要求的的,至少是當多重性身份以它們的自我形象為基礎時,不要去糾正這個多重性身份,也不要輕視它們的多重性身份。它也要求獨立自我的人不能為了說服它們自己是錯的而與多重性身份者接觸。

  More strongly,respect might require that singlets themselves accept,in the context of interacting with plurals,that peoplep are truly distinct people.By‘acceptance'I mean something articulated in 1992 by the philosopher L Jonathan Cohen,something different from belief.To accept something,in the way I mean,is to commit to treating it,in a particular context,as though it were true.For example,a defence lawyer,acting on behalf of a client,might accept that he is innocent,whether or not she believes that he is.

  更強烈的是,尊重可能要求獨立自我的人自己接受,在于多重性人格交流交流的情況下,人們才是真正區別開來的。我所說的“接受”是指哲學家喬納森·科恩(L Jonathan Cohen)在1992年闡明的與信仰不同的東西。我所說的是,要接受某件事,就是承諾在特定的背景下對待它,就像它好像是真的一樣。比如,辯護律師代表客戶做事,不管她相不相信他是否無辜,她可能都會認為他是無辜的。

  This view of what it means to respect plurals'identities is modest but not toothless.It asks singlets to try to see a plural through their own eyes–that is,through multiple peoplep's eyes.It also asks singlets to set aside how they might otherwise be inclined to respond to manifestations of plurals'own identities.

  這種尊重多重性身份的觀點是細微的,但并非毫無意義。它要求獨立自我的人試圖通過自己的眼睛看到多重性身份,也就是說,通過多人的眼睛來看。它還要求獨立自我的人撇開它們在其他方面可能傾向于如何回應多重性身份自身的表現。

  The reasons for showing this respect are partly social and moral.Plurals live with a discord between what they believe about themselves and what everyone else believes.Out in the social world–that is,the social world outside their heads–they mostly live as if they were the way that singlets see them.Perpetually acting in conformity with what others believe about you,and with what you disbelieve,is a way of living a lie.It's a lie even if everyone else is right and you're wrong.Many plurals would like to be able to live more truthfully yet without having to constantly defend themselves.

  顯示這種尊重的部分原因是社會和道德層面的。多重性身份的人生活在他們對自己的信仰和其他人的信仰間的不和諧之中。在社會世界里,也就是說,在他們頭腦之外的社會世界里,他們的生活大部分就像獨立自我的人所看待他們的方式。永遠按照他人對你的看法和你不相信的事物做事,是一種生活在謊言中的方式。即使他人都是對的,而你錯了,那也是一個謊言。許多多重性身份的人希望能夠更真實地生活,而不必不斷地自己辯護。

  Another ground for respecting plural identities is epistemic.I became interested in this community because some of their writings were clearly the work of thoughtful,analytical people.They made this one big claim that seemed(still seems)outrageous–just obviously false.But it's something that they've thought about a lot and that has been informed by aspects of their experience that I can't access.It therefore seems reasonable for me to conclude that I don't yet understand what they're claiming to be.And sometimes the only way to understand an idea is to‘try it on'.

  尊重多重性身份的另一個理由是認知。我開始對這個環境感興趣,因為他們的一些作品明顯是深思熟慮、善于分析的人的著作。他們提出了一個大的訴求,似乎(仍然)是離譜——只是明顯的錯誤。但這是他們考慮了很多,并且那是他們的經驗的多方面造就的,而我不能觸及。因此,我似乎有理由得出結論,我還不太理解他們所訴求的是什么。有時理解一個想法的唯一方式是去“嘗試”。

  The trying-on,in this case,can happen only in the context of respectfully engaging with a plural–engaging with them as a group of peoplep.This engagement will establish a relationship out of which understanding might emerge.Of course,I might achieve this greater understanding without coming to believe that what plurals say about themselves is true.A relationship,however,would put me in a position to grasp what their plural identities mean to them–what this does for them,what it scaffolds or supports in their lives.And that is the position we should work towards–the position we should always reach before challenging people about who they really are.

  在這種情況下,嘗試只能在尊重多重性身份的情況下進行——作為一個p人的群體參與進去。這種參與將建立一種可能產生諒解的關系。當然,我可能會獲得更大的理解,而不會相信多重性身份所說的是真的。然而,一段關系會讓我了解他們的多重性身份對他們而言是怎樣的——這對他們有什么作用,它在他們的生活中支撐的是什么。而這正是我們應該努力的方向——在向人們挑戰他們的真實身份之前,我們應該始終到達的位置。
網站部分信息來源于自互聯網和網友上傳,只為方便大家查詢瀏覽,請自行核對信息的真實情況,本站將不承擔任何責任!

您可以還會對下面的文章感興趣:

  • 36小時環游新加坡
  • 中國頒布新規,限制未成年人玩游戲
  • 辭掉工作、花了57天,他們找回了走失的狗
  • 改善健康也許很簡單:每天少吃300卡
  • 從《老友記》到《早間新聞》,詹妮弗·安妮斯頓的新旅程
  • 最新評論

    留言與評論(共有 條評論)
       
    驗證碼:
    美人捕鱼教程