专业代写:集体主义中国和个人主义美国谁会笑到最后？ - 人生八味 - 站内大杂烩 - 话题 - 王超杰 - 5G/五季网络

原题：中国和谐梦可能不输美国梦 David Brooks 文 盎山 译
布鲁克斯

        译者按：北京奥运会开幕式上令人惊叹的整齐划一表演，给所有人留下了深刻的印象，也使一些西方观察家开始重新思考有关集体主义和自由主义的命题。作为西方自由主义核心的理性选择难道仅仅是一种幻象？东方集体主义会不会重新崛起？本文作者点出了东西方人不同的思维模式，以及其背后的东西文化差别，同时提出了一系列引人深思的问题。大卫·布鲁克斯是美国著名的专栏作家，并不了解中国。奥运期间，他来到中国，并去四川探访，给《纽约时报》发挥他对中国的崛起的一些思考。他在另一篇文章《思念艾奇逊》里还谈到普世价值和民主联盟及对世界多极化的看法。这篇文章从另一个角度探讨了所谓中国模式的爆炸性和挑战性，及它给西方人带来的震撼和不安。

      这个世界有很多种划分方式，贫穷的和富有的，民主的和极权的，等等。不过最显著的划分是这样一种：具有个人主义精神的社会和具有集体主义精神的社会。

      这种精神差异深深地影响了人们对世界的看法，比经济的影响还要深远。如果你给一个美国人看一幅鱼缸的照片，他通常会介绍其中最大的那条鱼，描述它在做什么。如果你让一个中国人描述一个鱼缸，他往往会介绍鱼儿们所在的环境。

      这一类的心理实验其实已经做过很多次，结果都展示了同样的思维模式差异。美国人通常只看到个体，而中国人或是其他亚洲人总是看到事物的关联性。

     心理学家理查德·尼斯贝特(译注：《思维的版图》作者)给被测者分别展示鸡、母牛和干草的图片，然后让他们将其中两幅图挑出来放在一起，美国人往往选择鸡和母牛，因为他们都是动物。而大多数亚洲人会选母牛和干草，因为牛要吃草。美国人更倾向于分出类别，而亚洲人更注重于其中的关系。

      我们可以把世界看成这样的一个全球共同体：一端是最个人主义的社会，如美国和英国，另一端是最集体主义的社会，如中国和日本。

      个人主义国家往往把权利和隐私摆在第一位。这种社会里的人倾向于夸大他们本人的技能，高估他们个人的重要性，而忽略团体努力。而集体主义社会里的人通常看重和谐和责任。他们往往低估本人的技能，在说起成就时总不愿出风头，而归功于集体的努力。

     研究者们一直在争论，为什么某一些文化比另外一些更为个人主义化。有人说这是由于西方文化的价值观来自强调个人英雄主义的古希腊，而其他的文化则更多地来源于部落哲学。最近，一些科学家们提出，这些都是细菌惹的祸。集体主义社会总是出现在那些病菌孽生的地方，特别是赤道附近。在这种环境下，人们往往抵触外来者，唯恐他们会带来奇怪的疾病，同时这些人还会在饮食习惯和社会行为上采取固定模式。

      不管怎样，个人主义社会通常在经济上表现出色。西方的传奇是这样的：经过文艺复兴和启蒙时期，个人理性和个人意识得以发展，随之而来的就是资本主义的兴旺发达。在这个故事里，社会随着发展而变得益发个人主义化。

      不过，一旦集体主义社会摆脱了经济停滞，又会发生什么呢？一旦那些集体主义社会（特别是亚洲的那些）经济飞速增长，已经能同西方匹敌，世界又将会怎样？我们会看到，一场新的全球对话开始了。

     北京[的奥运]开幕式就是这场对话中一个无言的陈述。中国宣称，发展未必一定要依照西方自由主义方式，也可以走东方式的集体主义路线，开幕式就是这个宣言的一部分。

     开幕式回溯了中国悠久的历史，不过毫无疑问，其中最引人瞩目的特色就是几千个中国人整齐划一的表演，如同一个人在敲鼓，一个人在舞动，在阵列跑位时没有丝毫磕磕绊绊。我们过去曾看过大群体整齐划一的表演，不过现在看到的不只是表演，而是当代的集体主义——在中国奇迹般崛起的背景下，用高科技展示的和谐社会景象。

      如果亚洲的成功重新引发了个人主义和集体主义的争论(本来这场争论在冷战后看似已经结束)，那么个人主义力量不太可能再横扫战场，甚至难以占据优势。

     其中原因之一是：这个世界上崇尚个人主义的社会相对来说占少数。另一个原因是：近来不少科学研究的要点都倾向于表明——西方社会一切取决于个人选择的理念其实只是一种幻觉，中国将社会关系摆在第一位是对的。科学家们乐于向人说明——所谓的理性选择其实是一系列下意识影响的必然结果，就像情绪传染和启动效应。如果一群人在考试前想着一位教授，那他们的考试成绩比想着一个罪犯的另一群人要好。同时，科研已经证明人的大脑非常容易被渗透(它自然而然地模拟周围人的神经元放电)。人际关系是幸福的关键。交游广泛的人容易成功，而人际圈窄小的人更容易沮丧，甚至自杀。

      中国的崛起不仅仅是一个经济事件，也是一个文化事件。也许在将来，和谐集体的理念能和“美国梦”一样引人入胜。

      当然， 这个理念对雄心勃勃的独裁者来说更是得心应手。

文章原文：

        Harmony and the Dream
         
        By DAVID BROOKS
         
        Chengdu, China
         
        The world can be divided in many ways — rich and poor,democratic and authoritarian — but one of the most striking is thedivide between the societies with an individualist mentality and theones with a collectivist mentality.
         
        This is a divide that goes deeper than economics into the waypeople perceive the world. If you show an American an image of a fishtank, the American will usually describe the biggest fish in the tankand what it is doing. If you ask a Chinese person to describe a fishtank, the Chinese will usually describe the context in which the fishswim.

        These sorts of experiments have been done over and over again,and the results reveal the same underlying pattern. Americans usuallysee individuals; Chinese and other Asians see contexts.
         
        When the psychologist Richard Nisbett showed Americansindividual pictures of a chicken, a cow and hay and asked the subjectsto pick out the two that go together, the Americans would usually pickout the chicken and the cow. They‘re both animals. Most Asian people,on the other hand, would pick out the cow and the hay, since cowsdepend on hay. Americans are more likely to see categories. Asians aremore likely to see relationships.
         
        You can create a global continuum with the most individualisticsocieties — like the United States or Britain — on one end, and themost collectivist societies — like China or Japan — on the other.
         
        The individualistic countries tend to put rights and privacyfirst. People in these societies tend to overvalue their own skills andoverestimate their own importance to any group effort. People incollective societies tend to value harmony and duty. They tend tounderestimate their own skills and are more self-effacing whendescribing their contributions to group efforts.
         
        Researchers argue about why certain cultures have become moreindividualistic than others. Some say that Western cultures draw theirvalues from ancient Greece, with its emphasis on individual heroism,while other cultures draw on more on tribal philosophies. Recently,some scientists have theorized that it all goes back to microbes.Collectivist societies tend to pop up in parts of the world, especiallyaround the equator, with plenty of disease-causing microbes. In such anenvironment, you‘d want to shun outsiders, who might bring strangediseases, and enforce a certain conformity over eating rituals andsocial behavior.
         
        Either way, individualistic societies have tended to do bettereconomically. We in the West have a narrative that involves thedevelopment of individual reason and conscience during the Renaissanceand the Enlightenment, and then the subsequent flourishing ofcapitalism. According to this narrative, societies get moreindividualistic as they develop.

        But what happens if collectivist societies snap out of theireconomic stagnation? What happens if collectivist societies, especiallythose in Asia, rise economically and come to rival the West? A new sortof global conversation develops.
         
        The opening ceremony in Beijing was a statement in thatconversation. It was part of China‘s assertion that development doesn‘tcome only through Western, liberal means, but also through Eastern andcollective ones.
         
        The ceremony drew from China‘s long history, but surely themost striking features were the images of thousands of Chinese movingas one — drumming as one, dancing as one, sprinting on preciseformations without ever stumbling or colliding. We‘ve seen displays ofmass conformity before, but this was collectivism of the present — ahigh-tech vision of the harmonious society performed in the context ofChina‘s miraculous growth.

        If Asia‘s success reopens the debate between individualism andcollectivism (which seemed closed after the cold war), then it‘sunlikely that the forces of individualism will sweep the field or evengain an edge.
         
        For one thing, there are relatively few individualisticsocieties on earth. For another, the essence of a lot of the latestscientific research is that the Western idea of individual choice is anillusion and the Chinese are right to put first emphasis on socialcontexts.

        Scientists have delighted to show that so-called rationalchoice is shaped by a whole range of subconscious influences, likeemotional contagions and priming effects (people who think of aprofessor before taking a test do better than people who think of acriminal). Meanwhile, human brains turn out to be extremely permeable(they naturally mimic the neural firings of people around them).Relationships are the key to happiness. People who live in the densestsocial networks tend to flourish, while people who live with few socialbonds are much more prone to depression and suicide.
         
        The rise of China isn‘t only an economic event. It‘s a culturalone. The ideal of a harmonious collective may turn out to be asattractive as the ideal of the American Dream.

        It‘s certainly a useful ideology for aspiring autocrats.
来源：纽约时报      来源日期：2008-8-13