TED演講：我們都是設計師

　　I am no designer, nope, no way. My dad was, which is kind of an interesting way to grow up. I had to figure out what it is my dad did and why it was important.

　　我并不是一個設計師，完全不是。 我父親曾經(jīng)是， 這使我的成長非常富有趣味。 所以我得弄明白我父親的工作是什么， 以及為什么它如此重要。

　　Dad talked a lot about bad design when we were growing up, you know, "Bad design is just people not thinking, John," he would say whenever a kid would be injured by a rotary lawn mower or, say, a typewriter ribbon would get tangled or an eggbeater would get jammed in the kitchen.

　　父親在我們童年時經(jīng)常批評差的設計， 比如，他說：“約翰，差的設計是人們沒有慎重思考的結果， 無論是導致兒童被旋轉(zhuǎn)的割草機弄傷， 或者打字機紙帶被纏繞住， 或者廚房的打蛋器堵塞。

　　You know, "Design -- bad design, there's just no excuse for it. It's letting stuff happen without thinking about it. Every object should be about something, John. It should imagine a user. It should cast that user in a story starring the user and the object.

　　你懂的，你不能為差的設計找借口。 這是輕率地放任事情發(fā)生的后果。 所有物品都必須有意義，約翰。 它必須以用戶的角度為出發(fā)點。 它必須反映出，在以用戶和物品為中心的故事中，用戶的核心地位。

　　Good design," my dad said, "is about supplying intent." That's what he said.

　　好的設計，”我父親說過，“要能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)其存在的意義。” 這是他的原話。

　　Dad helped design the control panels for the IBM 360 computer. That was a big deal; that was important. He worked for Kodak for a while; that was important. He designed chairs and desks and other office equipment for Steelcase; that was important. I knew design was important in my house because, for heaven's sake, it put food on our table, right?

　　我父親參與設計了IBM360大型計算機的控制面板。 那是個大工程，且意義非凡。他為柯達工作過一段，那也很重要。 他設計了Steelcase公司的桌椅和一系列辦公用品;這也很有意義。 我認為設計對我的家非常重要，因為，上帝啊，有了它我們才能把食物拿上桌子，不是嗎?

　　And design was in everything my dad did. He had a Dixieland jazz band when we were growing up, and he would always cover Louis Armstrong tunes. And I would ask him every once in a while,

　　而設計就是我父親工作的全部。 我們童年時，父親有一支迪克西蘭爵士樂隊， 他可以隨時演奏路易斯.阿姆斯克朗的音樂。 我時不時會問他，

　　"Dad, do you want it to sound like the record?" We had lots of old jazz records lying around the house. And he said, "No, never, John, never. The song is just a given, that's how you have to think about it. You gotta make it your own. You gotta design it. Show everyone what you intend," is what he said. "Doing that, acting by design, is what we all should be doing. It's where we all belong."

　　“爸爸，你希望它聽起來和唱片里一樣嗎?” 我們的房子里到處躺滿了爵士樂的老唱片。 但他說，“不，永遠不，約翰，永遠不。 每首歌都只是授予我們的材料，這是你看待它的正確方式。 你要把它變成你自己的。你要設計它。 把你賦予它的意義展示給大家看。”這是他說的。 “設計，就是我們實現(xiàn)它的方式。 設計就是我們的最終答案。”

　　All of us? Designers? Oh, oh, Dad. Oh, Dad.

　　我們都是?都是設計師? 噢，噢，爸爸，噢，爸爸。

　　The song is just a given. It's how you cover it that matters. Well, let's hold on to that thought for just a minute. It's kind of like this wheelchair I'm in, right? The original tune? It's a little scary.

　　音樂是賦予的。 如何去改變它才是重點。 好，讓我們停在這一會兒。 這就像我坐的輪椅，對么? 原本的故事?有點恐怖。

　　"Ooh, what happened to that dude? He can't walk. Anybody know the story? Anybody?"

　　“噢，你看那個伙計怎么了? 他不能走路。有誰知道這個故事? 誰知道?”

　　I don't like to talk about this very much, but I'll tell you guys the story today. All right, exactly 36 years ago this week, that's right, I was in a poorly designed automobile that hit a poorly designed guardrail on a poorly designed road in Pennsylvania, and plummeted down a 200-foot embankment and killed two people in the car. But ever since then, the wheelchair has been a given in my life. My life, at the mercy of good design and bad design.

　　我不是很喜歡談論這件事，但是今天我想把這個告訴你。 好吧，確切的說是36年前的這個星期，好吧， 我在一個設計很糟糕的車子里 撞上了一個同樣設計糟糕的護欄 位于一個設計糟糕的路，在賓夕法尼亞， 從一個200英尺高的路堤上徑直跌下去 兩個人當場死在了車里。 從那以后，輪椅就成了我生活中的一部分。 我的生活中，有幸遇到好的設計和糟糕的設計。

　　Think about it. Now, in design terms, a wheelchair is a very difficult object. It mostly projects tragedy and fear and misfortune, and it projects that message, that story, so strongly that it almost blots out anything else.

　　想想這個，用設計的語言來講， 輪椅是一個非常困難的事物。 它通常被賦予害怕與不幸， 這個寄托的信息，這個故事，是如此的強烈 仿佛吸干了一切。

　　I roll swiftly through an airport, right? And moms grab their kids out of the way and say, "Don't stare!" The poor kid, you know, has this terrified look on his face, God knows what they think. And for decades, I'm going, why does this happen? What can I do about it? How can I change this? I mean there must be something. So I would roll, I'd make no eye contact -- just kinda frown, right? Or I'd dress up really, really sharply or something. Or I'd make eye contact with everyone -- that was really creepy; that didn't work at all. (Laughter) You know anything, I'd try. I wouldn't shower for a week -- nothing worked.

　　我在機場快速的滾動(輪椅)，好? 母親們從路上抓住他們的孩子并說道“別盯著看!” 那個可憐的孩子，你知道，充滿恐懼的看著他的臉，上帝知道他們是怎么想的。 幾十年了，我一直想， 為什么會發(fā)生這個?我又對此能做些什么?我能改變什么?我想這一定意味著什么。 我滾動著，躲開視線的接觸——就像一種皺眉，對么? 或者精心打扮整齊 或者，我和每一個人目光接觸 這真是詭異;這一點也不管用 (笑聲) 你知道所有這些，我都試過了。我一周沒洗澡——一點不管用。

　　Nothing whatsoever worked until a few years ago, my six-year-old daughters were looking at this wheelchair catalog that I had, and they said,

　　無論什么都不管用直到幾年以后， 我六歲的女兒們看著這個輪椅的目錄，她們說道，

　　"Oh, Dad! Dad! Look, you gotta get these, these flashy wheels -- you gotta get 'em!"

　　“噢，爸爸!爸爸!看啊，你一定要買這種閃光輪子的輪椅”

　　And I said, "Oh, girls, Dad is a very important journalist, that just wouldn't do at all."

　　我說道，“噢，孩子們，爸爸是個很重要的記者， 這跟我身份不符。”

　　And of course, they immediately concluded,

　　當然，她們立刻推斷，

　　"Oh, what a bummer, Dad. Journalists aren't allowed to have flashy wheels. I mean, how important could you be then?" they said.

　　“噢，好可惜，爸爸。記者不允許有閃光輪子。 我的意思是，你是有都重要才能擁有它們?“她們問道。

　　I went, "Wait a minute, all right, right -- I'll get the wheels." Purely out of protest,

　　為了反駁她們我說：“等等，好啦，我會買這種”

　　I got the flashy wheels, and I installed them and -- check this out. Could I have my special light cue please? (Laughter) Look at that! Now ... look at, look at this! Look at this!

　　我買了這臺輪椅，裝上發(fā)光輪子 我能讓燈光暗下來嗎? (笑聲) 你看! 現(xiàn)在，你看!你看!

　　So what you are looking at here has completely changed my life, I mean totally changed my life. Instead of blank stares and awkwardness, now it is pointing and smiling!

　　你眼前看的 完全改變了我的生活， 我的意思是徹底改變我的生活 我以前面對的是呆滯的眼神和尷尬， 現(xiàn)在它們在指指點點和微笑

　　People going, "Awesome wheels, dude! Those are awesome! I mean, I want some of those wheels!" Little kids say, "Can I have a ride?" (Laughter)

　　人們說道，“真了不起的輪子，伙計!真了不起! 我的意思是，我想要這樣的輪子!“小孩子說道， ”我能騎一下么?“ (笑聲)

　　And of course there's the occasional person -- usually a middle-aged male who will say, "Oh, those wheels are great! I guess they're for safety, right?" (Laughter) No! They're not for safety. No, no, no, no, no.

　　當然偶爾會有一些人—— 一般是中年男性會說到， ”噢，這些輪子太棒了! 我猜這樣為了更安全，對吧?” (笑聲) 不!它們不是為了安全。 不，不，不，不 ，不。

　　What's the difference here, the wheelchair with no lights and the wheelchair with lights? The difference is intent. That's right, that's right; I'm no longer a victim. I chose to change the situation -- I'm the Commander of the Starship Wheelchair with the phaser wheels in the front. Right? Intent changes the picture completely. I choose to enhance this rolling experience with a simple design element. Acting with intent. It conveys authorship. It suggests that someone is driving. It's reassuring; people are drawn to it. Someone making the experience their own. Covering the tragic tune with something different, something radically different. People respond to that.

　　這就是不同的地方， 沒有燈光的輪椅 和有亮燈的輪椅? 不同的地方在于設計意圖。 這就對了，這就對了;我不再是一個受害者。 我選擇改變情況——我是一個擁有前輪滾動發(fā)光的輪椅星球戰(zhàn)艦的指揮官，對么? 設計目的完全改變了人的感受。 我選擇改善 坐輪椅的體驗 用一個簡單的電子設計。 體現(xiàn)它的設計目的 它展示的是自主性。 它展示我是駕駛 它讓人心安，吸引人 讓他們有不同的感受 掩蓋過去的悲劇性 而給人不同 極度不同的感受。 人們對此有所回應。

　　Now it seems simple, but actually I think in our society and culture in general, we have a huge problem with intent. Now go with me here. Look at this guy. You know who this is? It's Anders Breivik. Now, if he intended to kill in Olso, Norway last year, dozens and dozens of young people -- if he intended to do that, he's a vicious criminal. We punish him. Life in prison. Death penalty in the United States, not so much in Norway. But, if he instead acted out of a delusional fantasy, if he was motivated by some random mental illness, he's in a completely different category. We may put him away for life, but we watch him clinically. It's a completely different domain. As an intentional murderer, Anders Breivik is merely evil. But as a dysfunctional, as a dysfunctional murderer/psychotic, he's something much more complicated. He's the breath of some primitive, ancient chaos. He's the random state of nature we emerged from. He's something very, very different.

　　看似簡單，但我認為 在我們的文化和社會中， 我們在設計目的有很大問題。 跟上我?？催@家伙。你知道這是誰么? 他是安德斯·貝林·布雷維克。如果他的意圖是在去年 挪威奧斯陸 殺死成批的人—— 如果他的目的就是這個， 那他是惡毒的。我們要懲罰他。 判終身監(jiān)禁。不像美國，挪威沒有終身監(jiān)禁。 但如果這是患妄想癥下的行為， 如果他是因為患了精神疾病才這樣做， 這就完全不同了， 我們也許會把他終身隔離起來， 但我們會對他醫(yī)療監(jiān)控。 與刑罰完全不同。 作為故意殺人犯， 安德斯·貝林·布雷維克是一個魔鬼。 但是作為一個有障礙的人， 一個有障礙的謀殺犯/精神病人， 他的這件事就更復雜了。 他是某種 原始，古老混亂的產(chǎn)物。 他的內(nèi)在性格十分混亂 不想我們能控制本能 他是某種非常非常復雜的人。

　　It's as though intent is an essential component for humanity. It's what we're supposed to do somehow. We're supposed to act with intent. We're supposed to do things by design. Intent is a marker for civilization.

　　目的是人性中非常重要的一環(huán)。 我們必須根據(jù)其做出反應。 我們必須根據(jù)目的行事。 我們必須根據(jù)設計行事。 目的是文明的象征。

　　Now here's an example a little closer to home: My family is all about intent. You can probably tell there are two sets of twins, the result of IVF technology, in vitro fertilization technology, due to some physical limitations I won't go into. Anyway, in vitro technology, IVF, is about as intentional as agriculture. Let me tell you, some of you may have the experience. In fact, the whole technology of sperm extraction for spinal cord-injured males was invented by a veterinarian. I met the dude. He's a great guy. He carried this big leather bag full of sperm probes for all of the animals that he'd worked with, all the different animals. Probes he designed, and in fact, he was really, really proud of these probes.

　　現(xiàn)在，這是我家的一個例子： 我家人做的一切都是根據(jù)目的。 你可以看見這有兩個上胞胎， 是試管受精科技的產(chǎn)物， 因為我個人的身體限制細節(jié)就不說了。 總而言之，試管受精。 就像農(nóng)業(yè)的意圖。 讓我告訴你，你也許有這樣的經(jīng)驗。 事實上，從脊椎受傷的男子身上抽取精子的技術 是由一位獸醫(yī)發(fā)明的。 我有見過這位老兄，是個很棒的人。 他攜帶者一個大皮帶 里面充滿從動物身上 抽取精子的工具。 這些用具是他設計的， 事實上，他也非常因此為傲。

　　He would say, "You're right between horse and squirrel, John." (Laughter) But anyway, so when my wife and I decided to upgrade our early middle age -- we had four kids, after all -- with a little different technology that I won't explain in too much detail here -- my urologist assured me I had nothing whatsoever to worry about.

　　他會說，“馬和松鼠基本用具都一樣，約翰” (笑聲) 但是不論如何，當我和我妻子決定 要讓我們生活更有品質(zhì)——我們已經(jīng)有了四個孩子， 用一些復雜的技術 我不會在這解釋太多細節(jié) 我的泌尿科醫(yī)師說我什么都不用擔心。

　　"No need for birth control, Doc, are you sure about that?"

　　“醫(yī)生，你確定我不用避孕嗎?”

　　"John, John, I looked at your chart. From your sperm tests we can confidently say that you're basically a form of birth control."

　　“約翰，約翰，我看了你的病例。 由你的檢測結果 我們可以很有信心的說 你身體本身已經(jīng)擁有避孕功能。”

　　Well! (Laughter) What a liberating thought! Yes! And after a couple very liberating weekends, my wife and I, utilizing some cutting-edge erectile technology that is certainly worthy of a TEDTalk someday but I won't get into it now, we noticed some familiar, if unexpected, symptoms. I wasn't exactly a form of birth control. Look at that font there. My wife was so pissed.

　　是么! (笑聲) 多么令人松口氣的想法啊!太好了! 過了幾個快和的周末， 我的妻子和我， 是用來先進的勃起技術 這技術某天一定成為TEDTalk的這題 但我這次沒辦法說， 我們發(fā)現(xiàn)一些相似的，意料之外的癥狀。 我的身體并沒有避孕功能。 看那個字。我太太氣壞了。

　　I mean, did a designer come up with that? No, I don't think a designer did come up with that. In fact, maybe that's the problem. And so, little Ajax was born. He's like our other children, but the experience is completely different. It's something like my accident, right? He came out of nowhere. But we all had to change, but not just react to the given; we bend to this new experience with intent. We're five now. Five. Facing the given with intent. Doing things by design. Hey, the name Ajax -- you can't get much more intentional than that, right? We're really hoping he thanks us for that later on. (Laughter)

　　我是說，設計師怎么想出來的? 不，我不認為設計師這個意圖。 事實上，也許那時故意為之的。 因此，小Ajax誕生了。 他向我們其他的孩子一樣， 但是感受完全不一樣。 這有點像意外事故，對么? 他莫名其妙的就來了。 但是我們不得不改變， 不是根據(jù)即成的是反映; 我們要讓新的經(jīng)驗充滿目的性 我們現(xiàn)在有五個(孩子)了。五個。 面對已經(jīng)給的目的。根據(jù)設計出來的事情做。 嗨，他叫Ajax——你不能比這個更多的目的性，對么? 我們真希望他以后能感謝我們 (笑聲)

　　But I never became a designer. No, no, no, no. Never attempted. Never even close. I did love some great designs as I was growing up: The HP 35S calculator -- God, I loved that thing. Oh God, I wish I had one. Man, I love that thing. I could afford that. Other designs I really couldn't afford, like the 1974 911 Targa. In school, I studied nothing close to design or engineering; I studied useless things like the Classics, but there were some lessons even there -- this guy, Plato, it turns out he's a designer. He designed a state in "The Republic," a design never implemented. Listen to one of the design features of Plato's Government 4.0:

　　但是我從來沒有成為設計師。不，不，不，不。從來沒有這個嘗試。甚至沒接近過。 當我長大的時候我的確喜歡一些產(chǎn)品設計： HP 35S計算器——老天，我愛死那個東西了。老天，我多希望我能擁有一個。 哥們，我愛死那個了。 我買的起。 另一些我喜歡大設計但是的確買不起，像1974 911 Targa(一種車的型號) 在學校，我學的和設計或者工程一點不沾邊; 我學習沒有用的像古典文學， 但是還是有一些課程的 這家伙，柏拉圖，原來是個設計師。 他設計了國家的“理想國” 一個從來沒有被實施的設計。 聽一下柏拉圖設計的 政府4.0版的特色

　　"The State in which the rulers are most reluctant to govern is always the best and most quietly governed, and the State in which they are most eager, the worst."

　　“在那些統(tǒng)治者不情愿實行統(tǒng)治的國家 往往治理的比較好且安穩(wěn)， 越是渴望統(tǒng)治國家的君主，他們的國家反而更糟”

　　Well, got that wrong, didn't we? But look at that statement; it's all about intent. That's what I love about it. But consider what Plato is doing here. What is he doing? It's a grand idea of design -- a huge idea of design, common to all of the voices of religion and philosophy that emerged in the Classical period. What was going on then? They were trying to answer the question of what would human beings do now that they were no longer simply trying to survive? As the human race emerged from a prehistoric chaos, a confrontation with random, brutal nature, they suddenly had a moment to think -- and there was a lot to think about. All of a sudden, human existence needed an intent. Human life needed a reason. Reality itself needed a designer. The given was replaced by various aspects of intent, by various designs, by various gods. Gods we're still fighting about. Oh yeah.

　　這有錯嗎，我們搞錯了嗎? 但是看到這樣的表述;充滿意圖。這正是我喜愛的。 但是考慮一下如果柏拉圖在這里。他會做些什么? 這是一個廣義的設計——一個大想法的設計， 對于所有的出現(xiàn)在古典時期的 宗教和哲學都適用。 接下來要怎樣? 他們將嘗試回答這個問題 當人類不再為生存而掙扎的時候人類在做什么? 當人類誕生于史前混亂時， 與殘酷，混亂的自然對峙， 他們有一刻突然開始思考，而且確實有很多要去思考 突然，人類存在一種對意圖的需要 人類的生活需要一個原由。 現(xiàn)實本身需要一個設計師。 需求被各種形式的意圖取代 意圖取代 由那些多種多樣的設計師 各種各樣的神 我們?nèi)匀缓蜕裨诳範?。我的老天?/p>

　　Today we don't confront the chaos of nature. Today it is the chaos of humanity's impact on the Earth itself that we confront. This young discipline called design, I think, is in fact the emerging ethos formulating and then answering a very new question: What shall we do now in the face of the chaos that we have created? What shall we do? How shall we inscribe intent on all the objects we create, on all the circumstances we create, on all the places we change? The consequences of a planet with 7 billion people and counting. That's the tune we're all covering today, all of us. And we can't just imitate the past. No. That won't do. That won't do at all.

　　現(xiàn)在我們不用面對自然的混亂。 現(xiàn)在的我們面對的混亂是人對地球的影響 這個年輕的學科叫做設計，我想， 這實際上是一種正在形成的新興的社會思潮 然后我們要回答一個新的問題 我們現(xiàn)在能做什么 去面對我們所制造的混亂? 我們能做什么? 我們?nèi)绾卧谖覀兯鶆?chuàng)造的 事物上賦予意圖， 所有我們創(chuàng)造的環(huán)境， 在所有我們改變的地方? 這個70億人并人口持續(xù)增長的星球上的后果。 這就是今天我們所有人要承擔的后果，所有人。 我們不能僅僅模仿過去。不。 不能那樣做。 完全不能這樣做。

　　Here's my favorite design moment: In the city of Kinshasa in Zaire in the 1990s, I was working for ABC News, and I was reporting on the fall of Mobutu Sese Seko, the dictator, the brutal dictator in Zaire, who raped and pillaged that country. There was rioting in the middle of Kinshasa. The place was falling apart; it was a horrible, horrible place, and I needed to go and explore the center of Kinshasa to report on the rioting and the looting. People were carrying off vehicles, carrying off pieces of buildings. Soldiers were in the streets shooting at looters and herding some in mass arrests. In the middle of this chaos, I'm rolling around in a wheelchair, and I was completely invisible. Completely. I was in a wheelchair; I didn't look like a looter. I was in a wheelchair; I didn't look like a journalist, particularly, at least from their perspective. And I didn't look like a soldier, that's for sure. I was part of this sort of background noise of the misery of Zaire, completely invisible. And all of a sudden, from around a corner, comes this young man, paralyzed, just like me, in this metal and wood and leather pedal, three-wheel tricycle-wheelchair device, and he pedals up to me as fast as he can.

　　這是一個我最喜歡的設計： 在1990年在扎伊爾金沙薩， 我為為美國廣播公司工作，我播報 推翻蒙博托·塞塞·塞科，扎伊爾的殘暴獨裁者， 他殘暴并搶劫整個國家。 當時在金沙薩的中部發(fā)生暴亂 那個地區(qū)很快就崩潰了;變得恐怖，非常恐怖， 我需要去金沙薩的中心探索 去報到暴亂和搶劫。 人們在車中，和建筑物中都會喪命 士兵在街道上射殺搶劫者或者把他們拘捕到一起。 我在混亂的中心滾著輪椅， 我完全就是隱形的，完全。 我坐在輪椅，完全不像搶劫者。 我在輪椅上;一點也不像是旅游者，特別，至少是他們無視。 并且我看起來也不像是士兵，那是確定的。 我是混亂的扎伊爾的一種背景噪聲，完全隱身。 突然，從周邊的一個角落，過來一個年輕人，癱瘓了，向我一樣， 在一個金屬，木材，皮革腳踏板， 三個輪子的輪椅上， 他踏著踏板盡全速向我駛來

　　He goes, "Hey, mister! Mister!"

　　他過來了，“嗨，先生!先生!”

　　And I looked at him -- he didn't know any other English than that, but we didn't need English, no, no, no, no, no. We sat there and compared wheels and tires and spokes and tubes. And I looked at his whacky pedal mechanism; he was full of pride over his design. I wish I could show you that contraption. His smile, our glow as we talked a universal language of design, invisible to the chaos around us. His machine: homemade, bolted, rusty, comical. My machine: American-made, confident, sleek. He was particularly proud of the comfortable seat, really comfortable seat he had made in his chariot and its beautiful fabric fringe around the edge. Oh, I wish I'd had those sparkly wheels back then to have shown him, man! He would have loved those! Oh yeah. He would have understood those; a chariot of pure intent -- think about it -- in a city out of control. Design blew it all away for a moment. We spoke for a few minutes and then each of us vanished back into the chaos. He went back to the streets of Kinshasa; I went to my HOTEL. And I think of him now, now ...

　　我看著他—— 除此之外他不會別的英語了，但是我們不需要英語，不，不，不，不，不。 我們坐在并排那里輪子輻條管子對齊 我看著他的瘋狂的腳踏機械; 他對自己的設計非常自豪。 我真想向你展示那個精巧的設計 他微笑，我們熱情洋溢 我們交流著一種關于設計的宇宙 通用語言 我們在周邊的混亂中隱身了。 他的設備：家庭制造，用螺栓栓的，生銹的，滑稽的。 我的設備：美國制造，自信的，井然有序的。 他對舒服的座椅特別的自豪，實在是一個舒服的座椅 他為他的二輪戰(zhàn)車 并且有漂亮的布穗在邊緣。 噢，我真希望我那些閃光的輪子裝回去給那哥們秀一下! 他一定會愛上那些的!噢呀! 他也本該理解這些的。 一個純意圖的二輪車——想想吧—— 在一個失控的城市。 設計在那一刻吹遍每一個角落。 我們聊了幾分鐘然后然后各自銷聲匿跡回混亂。 他回到了金沙薩的街道 我回到了旅店。我現(xiàn)在還想著他，現(xiàn)在...

　　And I pose this question. An object imbued with intent -- it has power, it's treasure, we're drawn to it. An object devoid of intent -- it's random, it's imitative, it repels us. It's like a piece of junk mail to be thrown away. This is what we must demand of our lives, of our objects, of our things, of our circumstances: living with intent. And I have to say that on that score, I have a very unfair advantage over all of you.

　　我提出這個問題來討論。 每個事物被灌輸意圖—— 他將由能量， 這個很寶貴，我們被他吸引。 一個事物缺乏意圖—— 它是混亂，它是模仿的， 它使我們厭惡。它就像廢信封一樣被遺棄。 這就是我們要從生活中探尋的， 從身邊的物品，從身邊的事情，從周圍的環(huán)境： 有意圖的生活。 我不得不說 在這一點上，我有一個對于你們來說，不公平的優(yōu)點

　　And I want to explain it to you now because this is a very special day. Thirty-six years ago at nearly this moment, a 19-year-old boy awoke from a coma to ask a nurse a question, but the nurse was already there with an answer.

　　我想將它向你表述因為這是非常特別的一天。 36年前的這個時刻， 一個19歲的男孩從昏迷中醒來 去問護士一個問題， 但是護士已經(jīng)準備好了答案。

　　"You've had a terrible accident, young man. You've broken your back. You'll never walk again."

　　“你遭遇了非常糟糕的事故，年輕人。你后背受傷了。 你再也不會站起來了。”

　　I said, "I know all that -- what day is it?" You see, I knew that the car had gone over the guardrail on the 28th of February, and I knew that 1976 was a leap year.

　　我說,“這個我都知道——今天是哪天?” 你看，我知道了車子是28日周五沖過了護欄， 并知道了1976年是閏年。

　　"Nurse! Is this the 28th or the 29th?"

　　“護士!這是28號還是29號?”

　　And she looked at me and said, "It's March 1st."

　　她看著我說道， “是3月1日”

　　And I went, "Oh my God. I've got some catching up to do!" And from that moment, I knew the given was that accident; I had no option but to make up this new life without walking. Intent -- a life with intent -- lived by design, covering the original with something better. It's something for all of us to do or find a way to do in these times.

　　我知道了，"哦，我的上帝。 我要有一些事情要做了 !" 從那一時刻起，我知道 是那起事故造成了這些; 我沒有選擇的余地除非 構造新的不能行走的生活。 意圖——人生的意圖—— 被設計的生活 用更好的 覆蓋原有的。 這是對于我們要做或找到一種方法，在這些時間做所有的事情。

　　To get back to this, to get back to design, and as my daddy suggested a long time ago,

　　回到這一點， 重新設計， 作為我的爸爸建議很久以前，

　　"Make the song your own, John. Show everybody what you intend."

　　“你自己來唱這首歌，約翰。 向每一個人展示你的想法”

　　Daddy, this one's for you. (Music)

　　爸爸， 這只為你。 (音樂)

　　? Jo Jo was a man who thought he was a loner ? ? but he was another man. ? ? Jo Jo left his home in Tucson, Arizona to attend a California bash. ? ? Get back, get back, ? ? get back to where you once belonged. ? ? Get back, get back, ? ? get back to where you once belonged. ? (Applause)

　　Jo Jo認為自己是個孤獨的人 但是他是另一個人。 Jo Jo離開他位于亞利桑那周圖森的家，來到了加利福尼亞的海灘 回去吧，回去吧， 回到你歸屬的地方。 回去吧，回去吧， 回到你歸屬的地方。 (鼓掌)