評論
打印
Why Donald Trump can’t kill the truth
為什么說唐納德·特朗普扼殺不了真相？
By Errol Morris
文/埃羅爾·莫里斯
HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I BEEN ASKED IF TRUTH IS DEAD?
是否真相已死？或至少，真相這一概念是否已經被破壞得無可救藥？
Or at least if truth as a concept has been hopelessly compromised?
要說我被問到這一問題的次數，
Many, many times. (Including by this very publication.)
答案是，很多很多次。(本刊就曾問過我這一問題。)
But truth is still with us—no matter how many people might insist otherwise.
但真相依然與我們同在——不管有多少人堅持相反的觀點。
There is one truth. Untruth, on the other hand . . .
話說回來，有一種真相，它就是“非真相”……
The Washington Post recorded 3,001 false or misleading claims made by President Trump in his first 466 days in office.
《華盛頓郵報》的記錄顯示，特朗普總統上任466天內共發表了3001條虛假或誤導性言論。
Is this just political in nature? Is it fake news? A gross misrepresentation?
其本質就是政治話語而已嗎？是假新聞嗎？還是普遍的誤解？
Consider Trump’s April 28 campaign-style rally in Washington, Mich.
就拿特朗普4月28日在密歇根州華盛頓鎮舉行的競選式集會來說。
As the Post summarized, throughout the course of his 80-minute speech,
正如《華盛頓郵報》總結的那樣，在80分鐘的演講中，
the President made a variety of false claims that ranged from stating that Henry Ford invented the assembly line
總統給出了各式各樣的錯誤說法，聲稱亨利·福特發明了流水線，
to asserting that Franklin D. Roosevelt served as President for 16 years
硬說富蘭克林·D·羅斯福擔任了16年的總統，
to boasting that a 2016 rally saw an audience about four times as large as it actually did
夸口2016年總統大選時觀眾的規模是實際規模的四倍，
to saying he has “essentially” gotten rid of Obamacare
稱自己“基本”已經廢除奧巴馬醫改，
to complaining that the U.S. loses “about $500 billion” because of its trade deficit with China,
抱怨美國因對華貿易逆差損失高達“5000億美元左右”，
even though the figure is about $300 billion and a trade deficit is not a win-lose statistic.
盡管實際數據為3000億美元左右，而且，貿易逆差并非決定贏輸的統計指標等等，不一而足。
It was a dizzying array of mistakes, lies and misrepresentations.
這一連串的錯誤、謊言和誤解簡直令人眼花繚亂。
We might distinguish these categories diferently or think some worse than others.
或許，我們會對這些類別進行不同的區分，或者認為有些類別比其他類別問題更為嚴重。
But this should not be considered a partisan issue.
但這些錯誤不應被視為黨派問題。
The truth is not a liberal plot.
這一問題的真相也并非自由派的陰謀。
The fact that anyone would think differently is in and of itself a cause for alarm.
任何人都會有不同的想法，而這一事實本身就已經值得警惕。
How much do we want to give up on?
在真相面前，我們究竟要放棄多少？
The shape of the earth? The heliocentric universe? The Pythagorean theorem? The structure of DNA?
放棄對地球形狀的認識？對以太陽為中心的宇宙的認識？還是對勾股定理的認識？對DNA結構的認識？
QUESTIONS ABOUT alternative facts and relative truths have been nettling me for decades.
幾十年來，另類真相和相對真相的問題一直困擾著我。
When I was a graduate student at Princeton University in 1972,
1972年我還在普林斯頓大學讀研究生時，
it had been 10 years since the publication of Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
托馬斯·庫恩的《科學革命的結構》就已經出版10年了。
The book made him famous.
這本書也是他的成名作。
Not because people had read it carefully—I just don’t believe that—
而他之所以成名，并非人們仔細讀了他的這本書——我完全不相信——
but because he came up with a number of notions that had a kind of general appeal.
而是因為他提出了一系列具有普遍吸引力的概念。
Principal among them was the “paradigm shift.”
其中，最主要的就是“范式轉移”這一概念。
譯文由可可原創，僅供學習交流使用，未經許可請勿轉載。
