How Computers Change the Way We Think.docx

How Computers Change the Way We Think 计算机如何改变我们的思维方式By SHERRY TURKLE 雪莉TURKLE由The tools we use to think change the ways in which we think. The invention of written language brought about a radical shift in how we process, organize, store, and transmit representations of the world. Although writing remains our primary information technology, today when we think about the impact of technology on our habits of mind, we think primarily of the computer. 我们使用的工具想改变的方式思考。语言文字的发明带来的彻底转变的过程中,如何组织、存储、传递世界的表现力。虽然写作仍然是我们的主要信息技术,今天当我们想到那些技术的影响我们的生活习惯的心灵,我们认为主要是你的计算机。My first encounters with how computers change the way we think came soon after I joined the faculty at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the late 1970s, at the end of the era of the slide rule and the beginning of the era of the personal computer. At a lunch for new faculty members, several senior professors in engineering complained that the transition from slide rules to calculators had affected their students ability to deal with issues of scale. When students used slide rules, they had to insert decimal points themselves. The professors insisted that that required students to maintain a mental sense of scale, whereas those who relied on calculators made frequent errors in orders of magnitude. Additionally, the students with calculators had lost their ability to do back of the envelope calculations, and with that, an intuitive feel for the material. 我第一次与计算机如何改变人们的思维方式,他很快就接著我就加入了教师在美国麻省理工学院在1970年代晚期,时代末期,开始计算尺时代的个人电脑。在一个午餐,几位高级初任教师教授在工程抱怨转变规则,计算器滑动影响他们的学生的能力,处理问题的规模。当学生们使用规则,他们不得不滑插入小数分自己。教授们坚持说,要求学生保持精神意义上的规模,而那些依赖计算器经常错误的数量级。此外,学生失去能力计算器去做“后面的极限的计算,与此同时,一个直观的感觉材料。That same semester, I taught a course in the history of psychology. There, I experienced the impact of computational objects on students ideas about their emotional lives. My class had read Freuds essay on slips of the tongue, with its famous first example: The chairman of a parliamentary session opens a meeting by declaring it closed. The students discussed how Freud interpreted such errors as revealing a persons mixed emotions. A computer-science major disagreed with Freuds approach. The mind, she argued, is a computer. And in a computational dictionary - like we have in the human mind - closed and open are designated by the same symbol, separated by a sign for opposition. Closed equals minus open. To substitute closed for open does not require the notion of ambivalence or conflict. 那学期课程,教导我的心理学历史。在那里,我经历了一个计算上的物体的影响学生对他们的情感生活的想法。我班上读了弗洛伊德的短文,滑的舌头闻名的第一个例子:一个议会主席打开一个会议宣布已经关门了。学生讨论如何解释这样的错误现佛洛伊德一个人的复杂的情绪。一个曾经同意佛洛依德的主要方法。她认为,思想,就是一台电脑。在一个计算词典就像我们在人类的头脑“关闭”和“开放”指定的同样的象征,相距示意的反对。“封闭”等于“减打开。”“关闭”来代替“开放”的概念不需要矛盾或冲突。When the chairman made that substitution, she declared, a bit was dropped; a minus sign was lost. There was a power surge. No problem. “当主席,替代,”她说,“有一点掉在地上,减去标志丢失。有一个权力激增。没问题。”The young woman turned a Freudian slip into an information-processing error. An explanation in terms of meaning had become an explanation in terms of mechanism. 这个年轻的女人变成了一种弗洛伊德溜进一个信息处理的错误。一个解释在语义上变成了一个机制来解释。Such encounters turned me to the study of both the instrumental and the subjective sides of the nascent computer culture. As an ethnographer and psychologist, I began to study not only what the computer was doing for us, but what it was doing to us, including how it was changing the way we see ourselves, our sense of human identity. 这种见面使我的研究工具和主观两方面的新兴的计算机文化。作为一个鲍尔稳-和心理学家,我开始学习不仅是电脑为我们做的,但它所做的是我们,包括如何改变我们自己,我们看到人类身份的感觉。In the 1980s, I surveyed the psychological effects of computational objects in everyday life - largely the unintended side effects of peoples tendency to project thoughts and feelings onto their machines. In the 20 years since, computational objects have become more explicitly designed to have emotional and cognitive effects. And those effects by design will become even stronger in the decade to come. Machines are being designed to serve explicitly as companions, pets, and tutors. And they are introduced in school settings for the youngest children. 在1980年代,我察看计算对象的心理效应在日常生活中很大一部分意想不到的副作用人们的思想和情感倾向于工程上他们的机器。在20年以来,计算物体变得更加明确设计拥有情绪和认知的影响。和那些“效果”将会变得更加强大设计未来十年来。机器正在为他们设计的明确、宠物、同伴和独创性。在学校里,他们介绍设置最小的孩子。Today, starting in elementary school, students use e-mail, word processing, computer simulations, virtual communities, and PowerPoint software. In the process, they are absorbing more than the content of what appears on their screens. They are learning new ways to think about what it means to know and understand. 今天,在小学里,学生开始使用电子邮件,文字处理,计算机模拟、虚拟社区,PowerPoint的软件。在这一过程中,他们身上的内容多出现在荧屏上。他们学习新的方法来思考这是什么意思,知道和理解。What follows is a short and certainly not comprehensive list of areas where I see information technology encouraging changes in thinking. There can be no simple way of cataloging whether any particular change is good or bad. That is contested terrain. At every step we have to ask, as educators and citizens, whether current technology is leading us in directions that serve our human purposes. Such questions are not technical; they are social, moral, and political. For me, addressing that subjective side of computation is one of the more significant challenges for the next decade of information technology in higher education. Technology does not determine change, but it encourages us to take certain directions. If we make those directions clear, we can more easily exert human choice. 以下是一个简短的全面列表,当然不是我所在的地方看信息技术鼓励思想变化。没有什么可以简单的方法是否有特殊的变更编目是好还是坏。这是有争议的地形。在每一步我们要问,作为教育工作者和公民,不管目前的技术方向,是带领我们在为我们的人类的目的。这样的问题不是技术,而是社会、道德和政治。对我来说,解决主观的一面,计算是一种更有意义的挑战,今后十年的信息技术在高等教育。技术不确定的变化,但鼓励我们采取一定的方向。如果我们让那些方向清楚的,我们可以更容易发挥人的选择。Thinking about privacy. Todays college students are habituated to a world of online blogging, instant messaging, and Web browsing that leaves electronic traces. Yet they have had little experience with the right to privacy. Unlike past generations of Americans, who grew up with the notion that the privacy of their mail was sacrosanct, our children are accustomed to electronic surveillance as part of their daily lives. 考虑隐私。今天的大学生习惯于世界网上的博客,即时通讯,和网页浏览让电子痕迹。然而他们没有多少经验与隐私权。不像过去的一代又一代的美国人,一起长大了的概念,在他们的邮件被神圣不可侵犯隐私,我们的孩子们习惯于电子监测作为他们日常的生活。I have colleagues who feel that the increased incursions on privacy have put the topic more in the news, and that this is a positive change. But middle-school and high-school students tend to be willing to provide personal information online with no safeguards, and college students seem uninterested in violations of privacy and in increased governmental and commercial surveillance. Professors find that students do not understand that in a democracy, privacy is a right, not merely a privilege. In 10 years, ideas about the relationship of privacy and government will require even more active pedagogy. (One might also hope that increased education about the kinds of silent surveillance that technology makes possible may inspire more active political engagement with the issue.) 我觉得增加同事对于隐私入侵把话题更多的消息,这是一个正面的改变。但中学和高中生往往愿意提供了个人信息网上没有保障,与大学生似乎对违反隐私和增加了政府和商业的监视。教授发现,学生不明白,在一个民主、隐私是一个正确的,不仅仅是一种特权。在10年内,思想的关系及隐私与政府需要更加积极的教学方法。(一个可能也希望加强教育的类型的沉默,就有可能监视技术可以激发更积极的政治参与同问题。)Avatars or a self? Chat rooms, role-playing games, and other technological venues offer us many different contexts for presenting ourselves online. Those possibilities are particularly important for adolescents because they offer what Erik Erikson described as a moratorium, a time out or safe space for the personal experimentation that is so crucial for adolescent development. Our dangerous world - with crime, terrorism, drugs, and AIDS - offers little in the way of safe spaces. Online worlds can provide valuable spaces for identity play. 圣灵或自我?聊天室,角色扮演游戏,和其他技术场馆提供不同的背景呈现为自己在线。这些可能是特别重要的,因为他们提供对青少年埃里克Erikson描述为一个时间,暂停或安全的空间,在个人的实验青少年发展是如此的重要。我们的危险的世界犯罪、恐怖主义、毒品和艾滋病提供了很少的安全空间。网络世界空间提供了宝贵的身份玩。But some people who gain fluency in expressing multiple aspects of self may find it harder to develop authentic selves. Some children who write narratives for their screen avatars may grow up with too little experience of how to share their real feelings with other people. For those who are lonely yet afraid of intimacy, information technology has made it possible to have the illusion of companionship without the demands of friendship. 但是一些人能流利表达自我的多个方面可以找到真正的自我努力研发更新。一些孩子写叙事为他们的屏幕替身长大可能太多和太少的经验分享他们的真实感受如何与其他的人。对那些感到孤独,但害怕亲密、信息技术使得人们有可能有幻觉伙伴的需求没有友谊。From powerful ideas to PowerPoint. In the 1970s and early 1980s, some educators wanted to make programming part of the regular curriculum for K-12 education. They argued that because information technology carries ideas, it might as well carry the most powerful ideas that computer science has to offer. It is ironic that in most elementary schools today, the ideas being carried by information technology are not ideas from computer science like procedural thinking, but more likely to be those embedded in productivity tools like PowerPoint presentation software. 从强大的想法PowerPoint。在1970年代末和1980年代初,一些教育家想做规划部分课程的课堂常规教育。他们认为由于信息技术携带的想法,但不妨挑最强大的思想,计算机科学所提供的。具有讽刺意味的是,在大多数的小学教育的今天,信息技术理念被携带不是思想从计算机科学的思考,但是,像程序更容易被那些埋在生产力工具,如幻灯片演示软件。PowerPoint does more than provide a way of transmitting content. It carries its own way of thinking, its own aesthetic - which not surprisingly shows up in the aesthetic of college freshmen. In that aesthetic, presentation becomes its own powerful idea. PowerPoint比提供一种方式传输的内容。它携带自己的思维方式,它自己的审美这并不令人惊讶的表现在审美的大学新生。在美学,演讲就变成自己的强大的主意。To be sure, the software cannot be blamed for lower intellectual standards. Misuse of the former is as much a symptom as a cause of the latter. Indeed, the culture in which our children are raised is increasingly a culture of presentation, a corporate culture in which appearance is often more important than reality. In contemporary political discourse, the bar has also been lowered. Use of rhetorical devices at the expense of cogent argument regularly goes without notice. But it is precisely because standards of intellectual rigor outside the educational sphere have fallen that educators must attend to how we use, and when we introduce, software that has been designed to simplify the organization and processing of information. 可以肯定的是,软件不能被指责为较低的知识水平。滥用前是一样的症状是导致后者。事实上,我们的孩子是文化,在这种文化中筹集到文化的表现,越来越多的企业文化,在这种文化中外观往往更为重要,而不是现实。在当代政治话语,酒吧也被降低。利用修辞强而有力的论点的代价定期去,恕不另行通知。但正是因为标准以外的智力开发教育方面有所下降,教育者必须参加我们如何使用,当我们介绍,软件设计用来简化组织和处理的信息。In The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint (Graphics Press, 2003), Edward R. Tufte suggests that PowerPoint equates bulleting with clear thinking. It does not teach students to begin a discussion or construct a narrative. It encourages presentation, not conversation. Of course, in the hands of a master teacher, a PowerPoint presentation with few words and powerful images can serve as the jumping-off point for a brilliant lecture. But in the hands of elementary-school students, often introduced to PowerPoint in the third grade, and often infatuated with its swooshing sounds, animated icons, and flashing text, a slide show is more likely to close down debate than open it up. 在“认知风格的PowerPoint”(图形出版社,2003),爱德华r的资讯”表明,bulleting PowerPoint等同与清晰的思维。它不教学生开始讨论或建立一个故事。它鼓励表现,而不是对话。当然,手中的大师,一个幻灯片展示几句话和强大的图像可以作为切入点,为一个辉煌的讲座。但在小学一年级学生的手,常被介绍到PowerPoint在小学三年级,常常迷恋它的swooshing声音、动画图标,闪光文本的幻灯片,更有可能关闭的辩论,不如说是打开它。Developed to serve the needs of the corporate boardroom, the software is designed to convey absolute authority. Teachers used to tell students that clear exposition depended on clear outlining, but presentation software has fetishized the outline at the expense of the content. 发展服务的需求,软件公司会议室设计传送绝对的权威。老师经常告诉学生明确清晰的概述,博览会取决于但演示软件已经fetishized大纲的代价的内容。Narrative, the exposition of content, takes time. PowerPoint, like so much in the computer culture, speeds up the pace. 叙事,揭露的内容,需要时间。在PowerPoint,就像如此之多的计算机文化,加快步伐。Word processing vs. thinking. The catalog for the Vermont Country Store advertises a manual typewriter, which the advertising copy says moves at a pace that allows time to compose your thoughts. As many of us know, it is possible to manipulate text on a computer screen and see how it looks faster than we can think about what the words mean. 字(词)处理技术中vs.思考。佛蒙特州的国家目录商店广告人工打字机,广告图片说”移动的速度,让时间来撰写的想法。”尽可能多的人都知道,它是可能操纵文本在电脑屏幕上的时候,看看它是怎么看起来比我们可以想想这些字的意思是什么。Word processing has its own complex psychology. From a pedagogical point of view, it can make dedicated students into better writers because it allows them to revise text, rearrange paragraphs, and experiment with the tone and shape of an essay. Few professional writers would part with their computers; some claim that they simply cannot think without their hands on the keyboard. Yet the ability to quickly fill the page, to see it before you can think it, can make bad writers even worse. 字(词)处理技术中有其自身的复杂的心理。从教育学的角度来看,它可以使致力于学习的学生进更多的作家,因为它能让他们修改文本、重排段落、和试验以色调和形状的文章。一些专业作家会分手对计算机;有些人声称他们不能简单地认为没有手在键盘。然而能够快速地填补这个页面的时候,看到它之前,你可以认为它,可使坏作家更糟。A seventh grader once told me that the typewriter she found in her mothers attic is cool because you have to type each letter by itself. You have to know what you are doing in advance or it comes out a mess. The idea of thinking ahead has become exotic. 一个八年级学生曾经告诉我,她发现她的打字机母亲的阁楼是“酷,因为你要打每一个字母时出现。你必须要知道你正在做什么提前或出来了一片混乱。”从长远考虑的想法已成为情调。Taking things at interface value. We expect software to be easy to use, and we assume that we dont have to know how a computer works. In the early 1980s, most computer users who spoke of transparency meant that, as with any other machine, you could open the hood and poke around. But only a few years later, Macintosh users began to use the term when they talked about seeing their documents and programs represented by attractive and easy-to-interpret icons. They were referring to an ability to make things work without needing to go below the screen surface. Paradoxically, it was the screens opacity that permitted that kind of transparency. Today, when people say that something is transparent, they mean that they can see how to make it work, not that they know how it works. In other words, transparency means epistemic opacity. 把事物在界面的价值。我们希望软件容易使用,我们假设我们不需要知道计算机是如何工作的。在1980年代早期,大多数计算机用户说透明度意味着,与任何其他的机器,你可以打开引擎盖”和“戳周围。但只有几年后,麦金塔用户开始使用术语当他们谈论文件和程序见他们所代表的吸引力,easy-to-interpret图标。他们所提及的能力使事物工作而不需要去屏幕表面以下。矛盾的是,这是一个允许萤幕混浊的那种透明。今天,当人们说这东西是透明的,他们的意思是说他们能够看到如何使它工作,而不是他们知道它是如何工作的。换句话说,透明意味着认识论的不透明度。The people who built or bought the first generation of personal computers understood them down to the bits and bytes. The next generation of operating systems were more complex, but they still invited that old-time reductive understanding. Contemporary information technology encourages different habits of mind. Todays college students are already used to taking things at (inter) face value; their successors in 2014 will be even less accustomed to probing below the surface. 那些买了第一代建或个人电脑的理解他们下到比特和字节。下一代的操作系统是更复杂的,但是他们还是邀请,老式的还原的理解。现代信息技术鼓励不同的习惯心灵。今天的大学生已经用来把事物在(国际米兰)票面价值;他们的继任者2014年将会有更少的习惯探测地表以下。Simulation and its discontents. Some thinkers argue that the new opacity is empowering, enabling anyone to use the most sophisticated technological tools and to experiment with simulation in complex and creative ways. But it is also true that our tools carry the message that they are beyond our understanding. It is possible that in daily life, epistemic opacity can lead to passivity. 模拟及其不满足的流氓。有些思想家认为新透明度,让人让人使用最先进的技术工具和试验用模拟在复杂和创造性的方式。但它也确实我们的工具完成这项任务,他们是远远超出了我们的理解。,这可能是在日常生活中,知识不透明度会导致消极。I first became aware of that possibility in the early 1990s, when the first generation of complex simulation games were introduced and immediately became popular for home as well as school use. SimLife teaches the principles of evolution by getting children involved in the development of complex ecosystems; in that sense it is an extraordinary learning tool. During one session in which I played SimLife with Tim, a 13-year-old, the screen before us flashed a message: Your orgot is being eaten up. Whats an orgot? I asked. Tim didnt know. I just ignore that, he said confidently. You dont need to know that kind of stuff to play. 我第一次意识到这样的可能性在1990年代早期,当第一代复杂仿真游戏介绍,立即开始广泛应用于家庭和学校使用。厦门市教的原则让孩子参与进化复合生态系统的发展,从这个意义上说它是一种独特的学习工具。在一次会议中,我扮演创办,一个13岁与蒂姆在我们面前,屏幕上闪现了一条短信:“你的orgot被吃掉。”“什么是一个orgot吗?”我问。提姆不知道。“我只是无视这一点,”他说大胆。“你不需要知道这类东西玩耍。”For me, that story serves as a cautionary tale. Computer simulations enable their users to think about complex phenomena as dynamic, evolving systems. But they also accustom us to manipulating systems whose core assumptions we may not understand and that may not be true. 对我来说,这个故事作为一种警醒。计算机模拟有能力让他们的用户思考的复杂现象,它的发展经历了动态系统。但是他们也习惯我们的系统核心假设操纵我们可能不明白,这可能不真实。We live in a culture of simulation. Our games, our economic and political systems, and the ways architects design buildings, chemists envisage molecules, and surgeons perform operations all use simulation technology. In 10 years the degree to which simulations are embedded in every area of life will have increased exponentially. We need to develop a new form of media literacy: readership skills for the culture of simulation. 我们生活在一个文化的模拟。我们的游戏,我们的经济和政治体系的应对方法,以及建筑设计、化学家建筑师所设想的分子,而外科医生的手术均采用仿真技术。十年后,在何种程度上模拟嵌入到生活的每个领域会增加指数。我们要制定一个新形式的媒介素养:读者的文化技能模拟。We come to written text with habits of readership based on centuries of civilization. At the very least, we have learned to begin with the journalists traditional questions: who, what, when, where, why, and how. Who wrote these words, what is their message, why were they written, and how are they situated in time and place, politically and socially? A central project for higher education during the next 10 years should be creating programs in information-technology literacy, with the goal of teaching students to interrogate simulations in much the same spirit, challenging their built-in assumptions. 我们来写文本阅读的习惯基于几个世纪的文明。最起