Гаррі Поттер після університету
А точніше “Harry Potter and the Methods of rathionality“. Я вже писав про те що це найкраща книжка з серії Поттера яку я читав. Вона не тільки тримає в напруженні, вона ще й написана з гумором (і не тільки тому що пародія) та страшенно просвітницька.
Я навіть дуже хочу її перекад українською, і зробив би сам, якби вмів. Але маю інші заняття і є люди які можуть зробити це краще за мене. Тут опублікую лише пару цитат, з мого Kindle, аби ви могли зрозуміти чому ця книжка дуже потрібна українською.
Про когнітивні упередження та потребу відділяти почуття і логіку:
He hadn’t tried to read. He wouldn’t have been able to focus. Funny how Harry’s brain just seemed to keep on running and running, never shutting down no matter how tired it got. It got stupider but it refused to switch off.
Про етику і індивідуалізм (Айн Ренд присутня):
“Not to mention,” Harry said, “being a Dark Lord would mean that a lot of innocent bystanders got hurt too!” “Why does that matter to you?” Professor Quirrell said. “What have they done for you?” Harry laughed. “Oh, now that was around as subtle as Atlas Shrugged.” “Pardon me?” Professor Quirrell said again. “It’s a book that my parents wouldn’t let me read because they thought it would corrupt me, so of course I read it anyway and I was offended they thought I would fall for any traps that obvious. Blah blah blah, appeal to my sense of superiority, other people are trying to keep me down, blah blah blah.” “So you’re saying I need to make my traps less obvious?” said Professor Quirrell. He tapped a finger on his cheek, looking thoughtful. “I can work on that.” They both laughed. “But to stay with the current question,” said Professor Quirrell, “what have all these other people done for you?” “Other people have done huge amounts for me!” Harry said. “My parents took me in when my parents died because they were good people, and to become a Dark Lord is to betray that!”
Про магію і науковий метод:
Harry had thought about the nature of magic for a while, and then designed a series of experiments based on the premise that virtually everything wizards believed about magic was wrong.
You couldn’t really need to say ‘Wingardium Leviosa’ in exactly the right way in order to levitate something, because, come on, ‘Wingardium Leviosa’? The universe was going to check that you said ‘Wingardium Leviosa’ in exactly the right way and otherwise it wouldn’t make the quill float?
No. Obviously no, once you thought about it seriously. Someone, quite possibly an actual preschool child, but at any rate some English-speaking magic user, who thought that ‘Wingardium Leviosa’ sounded all flyish and floaty, had originally spoken those words while casting the spell for the first time. And then told everyone else it was necessary.
But (Harry had reasoned) it didn’t have to be that way, it wasn’t built into the universe, it was built into you.
There was an old story passed down among scientists, a cautionary tale, the story of Blondlot and the N-Rays.
Shortly after the discovery of X-Rays, an eminent French physicist named Prosper-Rene Blondlot – who had been first to measure the speed of radio waves and show that they propagated at the speed of light – had announced the discovery of an amazing new phenomenon, N-Rays, which would induce a faint brightening of a screen. You had to look hard to see it, but it was there. N-Rays had all sorts of interesting properties. They were bent by aluminium and could be focused by an aluminium prism into striking a treated thread of cadmium sulfide, which would then glow faintly in the dark…
Soon dozens of other scientists had confirmed Blondlot’s results, especially in France.
But there were still other scientists, in England and Germany, who said they weren’t quite sure they could see that faint glow.
Blondlot had said they were probably setting up the machinery wrong.
One day Blondlot had given a demonstration of N-Rays. The lights had turned out, and his assistant had called off the brightening and darkening as Blondlot performed his manipulations.
It had been a normal demonstration, all the results going as expected.
Even though an American scientist named Robert Wood had quietly stolen the aluminium prism from the center of Blondlot’s mechanism.
And that had been the end of N-Rays.
Reality, Philip K. Dick had once said, is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away.
Blondlot’s sin had been obvious in retrospect. He shouldn’t have told his assistant what he was doing. Blondlot should have made sure the assistant didn’t know what was being tried or when it was being tried, before asking him to describe the screen’s brightness. It could have been that simple.
Nowadays it was called “blinding” and it was one of the things modern scientists took for granted. If you were doing a psychology experiment to see whether people got angrier when they were hit over the head with red truncheons than with green truncheons, you didn’t get to look at the subjects yourself and decide how “angry” they were. You would snap photos of them after they’d been hit with the truncheon, and send the photos off to a panel of raters, who would rate on a scale of 1 to 10 how angry each person looked, obviously without knowing what color of truncheon they’d been hit with. Indeed there was no good reason to tell the raters what the experiment was about, at all. You certainly wouldn’t tell the experimental subjects that you thought they ought to be angrier when hit by red truncheons. You’d just offer them 20 pounds, lure them into a test room, hit them with a truncheon, color randomly assigned of course, and snap the photo. In fact the truncheon-hitting and photo-snapping would be done by an assistant who hadn’t been told about the hypothesis, so he couldn’t look expectant, hit harder, or snap the photo at just the right time.
Blondlot had destroyed his reputation with the sort of mistake that would get a failing grade and probably derisive laughter from the T.A. in a first-year undergraduate course on experimental design… in 1991.
But this had been a bit longer ago, in 1904, and so it had taken months before Robert Wood had formulated the obvious alternative hypothesis and figured out how to test it, and dozens of other scientists had been sucked in.
More than two centuries after science had gotten started. That late in scientific history, it still hadn’t been obvious.
Which made it entirely plausible that in the tiny wizarding world, where science didn’t seem much known at all, no one had ever tried the first, the simplest, the most obvious thing that any modern scientist would think to check.
The books were full of complicated instructions for all the things you had to do exactly right in order to cast a spell. And, Harry had hypothesized, the process of obeying those instructions, of checking that you were following them correctly, probably did do something. It forced you to concentrate on the spell. Being told to just wave your wand and wish probably wouldn’t work as well. And once you believed the spell was supposed to work a certain way, once you had practiced it that way, you might not be able to convince yourself that it could work any other way…
…if you did the simple but wrong thing, and tried to test alternative forms yourself.
But what if you didn’t know what the original spell had been like?
What if you gave Hermione a list of spells she hadn’t studied yet, taken from a book of silly prank spells in the Hogwarts library, and some of those spells had the correct and original instructions, while others had one changed gesture, one changed word? What if you kept the instructions constant, but told her that a spell supposed to create a red worm was supposed to create a blue worm instead?
Про те що люди не можуть бути повністю раціонаістичними, і завжди корисно поспілкуватись з якоюсь дружньою але чесною Герміоною:
“Okay! So you gave me this whole long lecture about how hard it was to do basic science and how we might need to stay on the problem for thirty-five years, and then you went and expected us to make the greatest discovery in the history of magic in the first hour we were working together. You didn’t just hope, you really expected it. You’re silly.” “Thank you. Now -” “I’ve read all the books you gave me and I still don’t know what to call that. Overconfidence? Planning fallacy? Super duper Lake Wobegon effect? They’ll have to name it after you. Harry Bias.” “All right!” “But it is cute. It’s such a boy thing to do.” “Drop dead.” “Aw, you say the most romantic things.”
Про магію і теорію інформації:
And by similar logic: The words a wizard spoke, the wand movements, those weren’t complicated enough of themselves to build up the spell effects from scratch – not the way that the three billion base pairs of human DNA actually were complicated enough to build a human body from scratch, not the way that computer programs took up thousands of bytes of data. So the words and wand movements were just triggers, levers pulled on some hidden and more complex machine. Buttons, not blueprints. And just like a computer program wouldn’t compile if you made a single spelling error, the Source of Magic wouldn’t respond to you unless you cast your spells in exactly the right way. The chain of logic was inexorable. And it led inevitably toward a single final conclusion. The ancient forebears of the wizards, thousands of years earlier, had told the Source of Magic to only levitate things if you said… ‘Wingardium Leviosa.’
Коротше книжка гарна тим що може замінити мрію про Гогвортс на мрію про університет. Шкода що я її вже після університету прочитав.
Книжка поширюється безкоштовно, і некомерційно бо
Disclaimer: J. K. Rowling owns Harry Potter, and no one owns the methods of rationality.
Тому комерційне видання заборонене. Але я все одно думаю чи не віддати деяку частину свого заробітку Віктору Морозову аби він почав переклад і викладати його десь на github-і чи WordPress? Хтось знає як такі листи пишуться?
UPD Тут в коментарях питали чи то всі цитати. Ні, не всі.
Про маніпуляцію людьми:
(one experiment had shown that an unconditional gift of $5 was twice as effective as a conditional offer of $50 in getting people to fill out surveys).
Про подорожі в часі:
Say, Professor McGonagall, did you know that time-reversed ordinary matter looks just like antimatter? Why yes it does! Did you know that one kilogram of antimatter encountering one kilogram of matter will annihilate in an explosion equivalent to 43 million tons of TNT? Do you realise that I myself weigh 41 kilograms and that the resulting blast would leave A GIANT SMOKING CRATER WHERE THERE USED TO BE SCOTLAND?
Пародія на “Матрицю”:
WELCOME TO THE REAL WORLD (thanks to dsummerstay for reminding me to post this one) MORPHEUS: For the longest time, I wouldn’t believe it. But then I saw the fields with my own eyes, watched them liquefy the dead so they could be fed intravenously to the living – NEO (politely): Excuse me, please. MORPHEUS: Yes, Neo? NEO: I’ve kept quiet for as long as I could, but I feel a certain need to speak up at this point. The human body is the most inefficient source of energy you could possibly imagine. The efficiency of a power plant at converting thermal energy into electricity decreases as you run the turbines at lower temperatures. If you had any sort of food humans could eat, it would be more efficient to burn it in a furnace than feed it to humans. And now you’re telling me that their food is the bodies of the dead, fed to the living? Haven’t you ever heard of the laws of thermodynamics? MORPHEUS: Where did you hear about the laws of thermodynamics, Neo? NEO: Anyone who’s made it past one science class in high school ought to know about the laws of thermodynamics! MORPHEUS: Where did you go to high school, Neo? (Pause.) NEO: …in the Matrix. MORPHEUS: The machines tell elegant lies. (Pause.) NEO (in a small voice): Could I please have a real physics textbook? MORPHEUS: There is no such thing, Neo. The universe doesn’t run on math.
“Excuse me,” said Hermione, and then when the others looked at her again, “Ah…” while she tried to organize her thoughts. “I mean, um… Hannah… trying to become a hero so that a boy will like you isn’t very feminist.” “It’s pronounced feminine actually,” said Padma. “And why’re you calling Hannah unfeminine?” said Susan. “There’s nothing unfeminine about wanting to impress a boy.” “Besides,” said Parvati, sounding puzzled, “isn’t the whole point that we’re trying to be heroes even though that isn’t feminine?” The ensuing discussion would not be remembered by Hermione Granger as one of her most successful forays into the realms of political education. She tried to explain, and then after the resulting argument tried to explain again, while the other seven girls looked at her more and more skeptically. Afterward Daphne declared in the imperious tones of the future Lady Greengrass that if this feminism business meant girls weren’t allowed to pursue boys in whichever way they pleased, then feminism could stay in the Muggle lands where it belonged. Lavender suggested that maybe witchism could say that witches got to do anything they wanted, which sounded like more fun than feminism.
And finally Padma closed off further discussion by observing wearily that she didn’t see much point to going on arguing, since S.P.H.E.W. wasn’t about anything to do with feminism in the first place, it was just about more girls becoming heroes. Hermione had given up at that point.
Щоденник як засіб збільшеня щастя:
Citing experimental results about keeping a gratitude journal as a strategy for improving life happiness didn’t seem like it would be taken well.
Harry Potter had told him once that soldiers on a battlefield didn’t really fight for their country. Patriotism might get them to the battlefield in the first place, but once they were there, they fought to protect each other, the friends they’d trained with who were right in front of them. And Harry had observed, and Draco had known that it was true, that you couldn’t use loyalty to a leader to power a Patronus Charm, it wasn’t quite the right kind of warm and happy thought. But thinking of protecting someone beside you –
“Information theory 101,” the boy said in a lecturing tone. “Observing variable X conveys information about variable Y, if and only if the possible values of X have different probabilities given different states of Y. The instant you hear about anything whatsoever that varies between a spy and a nonspy, you should immediately think of exploiting it to distinguish spies from nonspies. Similarly, to distinguish reality from lies, you need a process which behaves differently in the presence of truth and falsehood – that’s why ‘faith’ doesn’t work as a discriminant, while ‘make experimental predictions and test them’ does. You say someone with the Dark Mark can’t reveal its secrets to anyone who doesn’t already know them. So to find out how the Dark Mark operates, write down every way you can imagine the Dark Mark might work, then watch Professor Snape try to tell each of those things to a confederate – maybe one who doesn’t know what the experiment is about – I’ll explain binary search later so that you can play Twenty Questions to narrow things down – and whatever he can’t say out loud is true. His silence would be something that behaves differently in the presence of true statements about the Mark, versus false statements, you see.”
Harry didn’t want to say in front of Professor McGonagall that the existence of brain damage implied that there were no such things as souls.
“Well, yes, frankly,” Harry said. “Love is real, Professor, a phenomenon with observable effects. Brains are real, emotions are real, and love is as much a part of the real world as apples and trees. If you made experimental predictions without taking parental love into account, you’d have a heck of a time explaining why my own parents didn’t abandon me at an orphanage after the Incident with the Science Project.”
In a moral dilemma where you lost something either way, making the choice would feel bad either way, so you could temporarily save yourself a little mental pain by refusing to decide. At the cost of not being able to plan anything in advance, and at the cost of incurring a huge bias toward inaction or waiting until too late…
Чому дівчатам треба давати подарунки:
“I was going to give you more space,” said Harry Potter, “only I was reading up on Critch’s theories about hedonics and how to train your inner pigeon and how small immediate positive and negative feedbacks secretly control most of what we actually do, and it occurred to me that you might be avoiding me because seeing me made you think of things that felt like negative associations, and I really didn’t want to let that run any longer without doing something about it, so I got ahold of a bag of chocolates from the Weasley twins and I’m just going to give you one every time you see me as a positive reinforcement if that’s all right with you -”
“You’re supposed to eat the chocolate,” Harry said, holding out the heart-shaped sweet like a Valentine. “Unless just being given a chocolate feels good enough to count as a positive reinforcement, in which case you probably need to put it in your pocket or something.”
Як правильно тренувати свій мозок:
“Hermione,” Harry said seriously, as he started to dig down into the red-velvet pouch again, “don’t punish yourself when a bright idea doesn’t work out. You’ve got to go through a lot of flawed ideas to find one that might work. And if you send your brain negative feedback by frowning when you think of a flawed idea, instead of realizing that idea-suggesting is good behavior by your brain to be encouraged, pretty soon you won’t think of any ideas at all.” Harry put down two heart-shaped chocolates beside the book. “Here, have another chocolate. Besides the one from earlier, I mean. This one is to reinforce your brain for generating a good candidate strategy.”
Про кохання і шлюб:
“But even with all that weird magical stuff letting me be more adult than I should be, I haven’t gone through puberty yet and there’s no hormones in my bloodstream and my brain is physically incapable of falling in love with anyone. So I’m not in love with you! I couldn’t possibly be in love with you! For all I know at this point, six months from now my brain is going to wake up and decide to fall in love with Professor Snape! Er, can I take it from this that you have been through puberty?”
“- and besides I’ve been reading about evolutionary psychology, and, well, there are all these suggestions that one man and one woman living together happily ever afterward may be more the exception rather than the rule, and in hunter-gatherer tribes it was more often just staying together for two or three years to raise a child during its most vulnerable stages – and, I mean, considering how many people end up horribly unhappy in traditional marriages, it seems like it might be the sort of thing that needs some clever reworking – especially if we actually do solve immortality -”
Про відповідальність і невинність:
“That’s not how responsibility works, Professor.” Harry’s voice was patient, like he was explaining things to a child who was certain not to understand. He wasn’t looking at her anymore, just staring off at the wall to her right side. “When you do a fault analysis, there’s no point in assigning fault to a part of the system you can’t change afterward, it’s like stepping off a cliff and blaming gravity. Gravity isn’t going to change next time. There’s no point in trying to allocate responsibility to people who aren’t going to alter their actions. Once you look at it from that perspective, you realize that allocating blame never helps anything unless you blame yourself, because you’re the only one whose actions you can change by putting blame there.
“A strange word, innocence. It means lack of knowledge, like the innocence of a child, and also means lack of guilt. Only those entirely ignorant can lack all responsibility for the consequences of their actions. He knows not what he does, and therefore can be without harmful intent; so says that word.”
Про компетентність і милосердя:
The Headmaster’s eyes were impenetrable behind the half-moon glasses. “Argus Filch is a Squib. His work at Hogwarts is all he has. Had, rather.” “The purpose of a school is not to provide work for its employees…
Harry had read once, somewhere, that the opposite of happiness wasn’t sadness, but boredom; and the author had gone on to say that to find happiness in life you asked yourself not what would make you happy, but what would excite you. And by the same reasoning, hatred wasn’t the true opposite of love. Even hatred was a kind of respect that you could give to someone’s existence. If you cared about someone enough to prefer their dying to their living, it meant you were thinking about them.
Про системи безпеки:
Harry’s suspension of disbelief had already checked out on vacation at this point, so he didn’t say anything about how real-world security systems had the goal of distinguishing authorized from unauthorized personnel, which meant issuing challenges that behaved differently around people who were or weren’t supposed to be there. For example, a good security challenge would be testing whether the entrant knew a lock combination that only authorized people had been told, and a bad security challenge would be testing whether the entrant could brew a potion according to written instructions that had been helpfully included.
You will wonder how a country can manage to employ three of its four citizens in bureaucracy. The answer is that if they did not all prevent each other from doing their jobs, none of them would have any work left to do! The Aurors were competent as individual fighters, they did fight Dark Wizards and only the best survived to train new recruits, but their leadership was in absolute disarray. The Ministry was so busy routing papers that the country had no effective opposition to Voldemort’s attacks except myself, Dumbledore, and a handful of untrained irregulars.