【正文】 and especially, the graduates: 尊敬的Bok校長(zhǎng)，Rudenstine前校長(zhǎng)，即將上任的Faust校長(zhǎng)，哈佛集團(tuán)的各位成員，監(jiān)管理事會(huì)的各位理事，各位老師，各位家長(zhǎng)，各位同學(xué)：I39。我希望，在那個(gè)時(shí)候，你們用來評(píng)價(jià)自己的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，不僅僅是你們的專業(yè)成就，而包括你們?yōu)楦淖冞@個(gè)世界深刻的不平等所做出的努力，以及你們?nèi)绾紊拼切┻h(yuǎn)隔千山萬水、與你們毫不涉及的人們，你們與他們唯一的共同點(diǎn)就是同為人 類。你們必須盡早開始，盡可能長(zhǎng)時(shí)期堅(jiān)持下去。有了這樣的了解之后，要是你再棄那些你可以幫助的人們于不顧，就將受到良心的譴責(zé)，只需一點(diǎn)小小的努力，你就可以改變 那些人們的生活。當(dāng)你們離開哈佛的時(shí)候，你們擁有的技術(shù)，是我們那一屆學(xué)生所沒有的。You graduates are ing of age in an amazing you leave Harvard, you have technology that members of my class never have awareness of global inequity, which we did not with that awareness, you likely also have an informed conscience that will torment you if you abandon these people whose lives you could change with very little have more than we had。將解決人類的不平等視為己任。Don’t let plexity stop on the big will be one of the great experiences of your 。但是，你們不必一定要去做那些大事。In line with the promise of this age, I want to exhort each of the graduates here to take on an issue – a plex problem, a deep inequity, and bee a specialist on you make it the focus of your career, that would be you don’t have to do that to make an a few hours every week, you can use the growing power of the Internet to get informed, find others with the same interests, see the barriers, and find ways to cut through provided同這個(gè)時(shí)代的期望一樣，我也要向今天各位畢業(yè)的同學(xué)提出一個(gè)忠告：你們要選擇一個(gè)問題，一個(gè)復(fù)雜的問題，一個(gè)有關(guān)于人類深刻的不平等的問題，然后你 們要變成這個(gè)問題的專家。在那封信的結(jié)尾，她寫道： “ 對(duì)于那些接受了許多幫助的人們，他們還在期待更多的幫助。在這個(gè)儀式上，她高聲朗讀了一封關(guān)于婚姻的信，這是她寫給 Melinda 的。她從沒有停止督促我，去為他人做更多的事情。你必須用自己的行動(dòng)來回答它們。What for?我們可以做些什么?There is no question that the faculty, the alumni, the students, and the benefactors of Harvard have used their power to improve the lives of people here and around the can we do more? Can Harvard dedicate its intellect to improving the lives of people who will never even hear its name?毫無疑問，哈佛的老師、校友、學(xué)生和資助者，已經(jīng)用他們的能力改善了全世界各地人們的生活。Members of the Harvard Family: Here in the Yard is one of the great collections of intellectual talent in the 。We need as many people as possible to have access to this technology, because these advances are triggering a revolution in what human beings can do for one are making it possible not just for national governments, but for universities, corporations, smaller organizations, and even individuals to see problems, see approaches, and measure the impact of their efforts to address the hunger, poverty, and desperation George Marshall spoke of 60 years provided我們需要盡可能地讓更多的人有機(jī)會(huì)使用新技術(shù)，因?yàn)檫@些新技術(shù)正在引發(fā)一場(chǎng)革命，人類將因此可以互相幫助。這意味著，還有許多具有創(chuàng)造性的人們，沒有加入到我們的討論中來。這就大大加快了革新的進(jìn)程，發(fā)展速度簡(jiǎn)直快得讓人震驚。The magical thing about this network is not just that it collapses distance and makes everyone your also dramatically increases the number of brilliant minds we can have working together on the same problem – and that scales up the rate of innovation to a staggering ，不僅僅是它縮短了物理距離，使得天涯若比鄰。那時(shí)，新技術(shù)剛剛開始萌芽，它們將使得這個(gè)世界變得更小、更開放、更容易看到、距離更近。事實(shí)上，經(jīng)過層層傳播，想要真正地把握形勢(shì)，是根本不可能的。Sixty years ago, George Marshall came to this mencement and announced a plan to assist the nations of postwar said: I think one difficulty is that the problem is one of such enormous plexity that the very mass of facts presented to the public by press and radio make it exceedingly difficult for the man in the street to reach a clear appraisement of the is virtually impossible at this distance to grasp at all the real significance of the ，宣布了一個(gè)計(jì)劃，幫助那些歐洲國(guó)家的戰(zhàn)后建設(shè)。這些新工具可以幫助我們，將人類的同情心發(fā)揮最大的作用，這就是為什么將來同過去是不一樣的。Still, I’m , inequity has been with us forever, but the new tools we have to cut through plexity have not been with us are new – they can help us make the most of our caring – and that’s why the future can be different from the ，在這個(gè)問題上，我依然是樂觀的。我喜歡人們因?yàn)檐浖械郊?dòng)，那么我們?yōu)槭裁床荒軌蜃屓藗円驗(yàn)槟軌蛘壬械礁蛹?dòng)呢?You can’t get people excited unless you can help them see and feel the how you do that – is a plex ，否則你無法讓人們激動(dòng)。天哪，是幾百萬!想一想吧，拯救一個(gè)人的生命已經(jīng)讓人何等激動(dòng)，現(xiàn)在你要把這種激動(dòng)再乘上幾百萬倍 …… 但是，不幸的是，這是我參加過的最最乏味的論壇，乏味到我無法強(qiáng)迫自己聽下去。你必須展示你的項(xiàng)目的人性因素，這樣其他人就會(huì)感到拯救一個(gè)生命，對(duì)那些處在困境中的家庭到底意味著什么。But if you want to inspire people to participate, you have to show more than numbers。你也必須讓他人知道，兒童死亡人數(shù)下降了多少。You have to have the statistics, of have to be able to show that a program is vaccinating millions more have to be able to show a decline in the number of children dying from these is essential not just to improve the program, but also to help draw more investment from business and ，你必須有一些統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字。我們千萬不能再犯上個(gè)世紀(jì)在瘧疾和肺結(jié)核上犯過的錯(cuò)誤，那時(shí)我們因?yàn)樗鼈兲珡?fù)雜，而放棄了采取行動(dòng)。這是一種模式。因此，與此同時(shí)，我們必須使用現(xiàn)有的技術(shù)，目前最有效的預(yù)防方法 就是設(shè)法讓人們避免那些危險(xiǎn)的行為。所以，政府、制藥公司、基金會(huì)應(yīng)該資助疫苗研究。最高效的方法是預(yù)防。The AIDS epidemic offers an broad goal, of course, is to end the highestleverage approach is ideal technology would be a vaccine that gives lifetime immunity with a single governments, drug panies, and foundations fund vaccine their work is likely to take more than a decade, so in the meantime, we have to work with what we have in hand – and the best prevention approach we have now is getting people to avoid risky 。但是，世界的復(fù)雜性使得很難找到對(duì)全世界每一個(gè)有愛心的人都有效的行動(dòng)方法，因此人類對(duì)他人的關(guān)心往往很難產(chǎn)生實(shí)際效果。如果我們有一個(gè)清晰的和可靠的答案，那么當(dāng)任何組織和個(gè)人發(fā)出疑問 “ 如何我能提供幫助 ” 的時(shí) 候，我們就能采取行動(dòng)。If we can really see a problem, which is the first step, we e to the second step: cutting through the plexity to find a ，也不過是邁出了第一步，接著還有第二步：那就是從復(fù)雜的事件中找到解決辦法?？粗耸芸嗍橇钊送纯嗟?，何況問題又如此復(fù)雜，我們根本不知道如何去幫助他 人。如果沒有人報(bào)道，那么這些事件就很容易被忽視。我們問： “ 這個(gè)世界怎么可以眼睜睜看著這些孩子死去? ”我們并沒有很多機(jī)會(huì)了解那些死亡事件。如果這是真的，那么它理應(yīng)是我們努力的頭等大事。If you believe that every life has equal value, it’s revolting to learn that some lives are seen as worth saving and others are said to ourselves: This can’t be if it is true, it deserves to be the priority of our ，那么當(dāng)你發(fā)現(xiàn)某些生命被挽救了，而另一些生命被放棄了，你會(huì)感到無法接受。但是事實(shí)并非如此。We were had just assumed that if millions of children were dying and they could be saved, the world would make it a priority to discover and deliver the medicines to save it did under a dollar, there were interventions that could save lives that just weren’t being 。During our discussions on this question, Melinda and I read an article about the millions of children who were dying every year in poor countries from diseases that we had long ago made harmless