一段艰难的过往并不是一份生活资产

Friedrich Nietzsche, the German philosopher, famously said: "That which does not kill us makes us stronger." This notion found life beyond Nietzsche's--which is ironic, his having been rather short and miserable--and it continues to resonate within American culture.

德国哲学家，弗里德里希.尼采，有句著名的话，“不能把你杀死的，将使你更坚强。”这条见解讽刺性的超越了尼采短暂悲惨的一生，在美国文化中仍有一席之地。

One reason is that suffering, as Freud famously recognized, is an inevitable part of life. Thus we have developed many ways to try to ease it--one of which is bestowing upon it transformative powers (another is by believing in an afterlife, of which Freud disapproved; still another is cocaine, of which he was, for a time, a fan).

其中一个原因是忍受，正如弗洛伊德所提及，是人生中不可避免的一环。因此我们尽力找出很多方法去缓和它-----其中一个办法是寄希望于变化的力量（另一个是相信来世，弗洛伊德本人很不赞成。还有一个是（尝试）可卡因，他自己，曾经一度倒是非常痴迷）

Another reason is that American culture, born of trauma and imbued with a hopeful can-do ethos, wants to believe this idea, finding it self-affirming. Once we have acquired a certain belief we tend to see, remember, and report mostly instances and events that support it. This is called confirmation bias.

在逆境中不断繁荣

还有个原因是美国文化，在创伤中出生，被热心诚挚的民族精神所感染，想要相信它的一代，发现这个论点非常武断。一旦我们达到了我们（心中的）那个具体目标，我们就倾向于看到，记住，并只报道那些支持它的实例与事件。这就被称作认可偏误。

Another reason we think trauma may be transformative is that we see variants of this process around us. Bacteria that are not killed entirely by an antibiotic will mutate and become resistant to it. People who go through the hardship of training tend to improve their performance. But human beings are not bacteria, and good training is not a traumatic event.

另一个原因是我们认为创伤也许是我们身边那些事情中的不同进程的变化（所造成）。没有被抗生素完全杀死的细菌会突变并产生抗药性。经历过艰难训练的人们倾向于改善他们的表现。但是人类不是细菌，好的训练也并不是创伤性事件。

Now it is true that, in an evolutionary sense, those who survive a calamity are by definition the fittest. But it is not the calamity that made them so. For our minds, however, the leap is short between seeing the strong emerge from a calamity and concluding that they are strong because of the calamity.

现在可以证实，从进化意义来看，那些从不幸事件中挺过来的人毫无疑问是最适合的。但是并不是不幸事件使他们这样。然而，对于我们的理智而言，从看见不幸事件出现到确定他们因为不幸事件而变得很强之间的跳跃太突然了。

Our brain is a meaning-making machine, designed to sort vast and varied sensory information into coherent, orderly perception, organized primarily in the form of narrative: this happened, which led to that, which ended up so. When two things happen together, we assume they are meaningfully linked, and then we rush to bind them in a quite unholy cause-and-effect matrimony.

我们的头脑是有意识的机器，被设计成能分类、理清大量多种多样的知觉信息，并初步把它们整理成诉述语言：这发生也这样结束。当两样东西一起发生时，我们假定它们之间存在意义上的联系，然后我们匆忙把它们组合在一起造成不合适的一对因果关系。

当你相信你不了解的事情时……

This tendency to infer causality from co-occurrence is not limited to humans; caged pigeons, receiving food at random intervals not related to their behavior, will nevertheless repeat any movement they happened to be doing before food appeared. The pigeons become, in a sense, superstitious.

这个影响同时出现的因果关系的倾向并不局限于人类；关在笼子里的鸽子，若不根据它们的行为而任意间隔来给食物的话，在食物出现之前将永远不会重复它们所作的任何动作。鸽子，在某种意义上，变得很“迷信”。

在逆境中“凋零”

As do we. In humans, many common beliefs are based on this error. Some are trivial, like a fan's belief that wearing his lucky jersey helps his team win. But others are weightier. Because parenting behaviors co-occur with children's developing personalities, many parents assume that their behaviors actually shape their children's personalities. The evidence from developmental research overwhelmingly shows that they don't. In fact, the causality is often reversed, as temperamentally-easy children enable their parents to feel competent. Good children often create good parents.

正如我们。在人类中，很多常识都基于错误。有些不重要，像是粉丝相信穿他的幸运衫可以帮助他喜欢的队伍赢。但是其他一些诸如过磅员，因为教养行为和孩子们的能力共现，很多父母假定他们的行为实际上会塑造他们孩子的性格。（但）来自开发研究的证据不可抵抗地表明他们没有。事实上，因果关系常常颠倒，性格好的孩子使他们的父母感到能干。好孩子常常创造杰出的父母。

Our eagerness to ease the pain of suffering by rationalizing it, along with our tendency to look for information supportive of our preexisting beliefs and see meaning and causality in co-occurrence, all help explain how we arrive at our belief in the school of hard knocks.

我们热心地通过把它合理化，伴随着我们追寻先前存在的信念、看见共现里的意义和因果关系，所有的这些帮助我们解释怎样在艰难险阻中达成我们的信仰，来减轻忍受的痛苦。

But the bulk of psychological research on the topic shows that, as a rule, if you are stronger after hardship, it is probably despite, not because of the hardship. The school of hard knocks does little more than knock you down, hard. Nietzschian--and country song--wisdom notwithstanding, we are not stronger in the broken places. What doesn't kill us in fact makes us weaker.

但是在这方面的大量心理研究表面，有条不成文规定，如果你在经受艰难之后变得要强一些，那可能不是因为那些艰难的时光。大堆的麻烦事除了把你狠狠打倒之外对你帮助甚少。尼采------和国歌------尽管明智，（但是）我们不会在在废墟中变得更强。那些没有杀死我们的，事实上使我们更虚弱。

Developmental research has shown convincingly that traumatized children are more, not less, likely to be traumatized again. Kids who grow up in a tough neighborhood become weaker, not stronger. They are more, not less likely to struggle in the world.

发展研究令人信服的表面受过创伤的儿童更多地，并不是更少，可能再度受伤。在艰难的环境中长大的孩子们变得更弱，而不是更强。他们更多而不是更少地在这个世界上挣扎着。

Trauma with lasting effects

创伤有着持久的影响。

And the effect on adults is generally similar. For example, in one recent study, healthy adults viewed fearful and calm faces while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging to measure activity in the amygdale, the part of the brain that forms and stores emotional memories. Half of the participants were within 1.5 miles of the World Trade Center on 9/11 and the other half lived at least 200 miles away. Participants who were near the World Trade Center on 9/11 had significantly higher amygdale activity when looking at the fearful faces compared to those who were living more than 200 miles away. "Our findings suggest that there may be long-term neurobiological correlates of trauma exposure, even in people who appear resilient," said Dr. Barbara Ganzel, the lead researcher, "We have known for a long time that trauma exposure can lead to subsequent vulnerability to mental health disorders years after the trauma. This research is giving us clues about the biology underlying that vulnerability." When trauma and hardship do leave a mark, it is usually a bruise under the skin, not a notch on the belt.

对成人的影响也是类似的，例如，在最近的研究中，健康的成人在观看恐惧和镇静的脸时也在经历情绪波动，他们的杏仁孔，脑部用来产生储存情绪记忆的部位，也在活动。参与者中一半人当时在“9.11”世贸中心事件爆发地1.5里内，另一半人则在200里外。离“911”世贸中心近的参与者在观看恐惧的脸时相对当时在那些200里外的参与者有着严重的高杏仁孔活动。“我们的研究使人意识到创伤可能是长期的影响，即使人们表现得很坚韧。”芭芭拉.甘泽尔，首席研究员说，我们很久就已经意识到创伤性伤害会导致受伤之后多年的精神健康紊乱。这项研究给了我们关于在生物方面找到易损性的线索。“当创伤和艰难困苦一定要留下印迹的时候，它通常不仅会留下皮带抽打的痕迹，更会在心里留下不灭的伤疤。

Years ago, during my mandatory army service in Israel, I took part in anti-terrorist training that involved working with the K9 unit. I asked the unit commander where he found those vicious attack dogs of his. Most people, he said, believe that wild street dogs make the best anti-terrorist dogs, having survived the, well, dog-eat-dog world of the mean streets. But the truth is just the opposite. Street dogs are useless for this--or any other--work because they are unpredictable and not trainable. Dogs that have been well cared for, loved, and protected all their lives--those are the best anti-terrorist dog candidates.

多年前，在我于以色列服强制性兵役期间，我参加了与军犬协作的反恐训练。我问部队指挥官他是从哪弄到这些凶恶攻击性强的狗的。他说，大多数人都相信经受了街头残酷的狗咬狗经历洗礼的流浪狗能做最好的反恐犬，但是事实与之正好相反。流浪狗干不了这份工作，也干不好其他工作，因为难以预料它们会做什么，也没有经受过训练。只有那些一生受过良好照顾的，被悉心关爱，保护的狗才能做最好的反恐犬。

没经受艰难困苦的军犬

And this is true for humans as well. Mayhem and chaos don't toughen you up, and they don't prepare you well to deal with the terror of this world. Tender love and care toughen you up, because they nurture and strengthen your capacity to learn and adapt, including learning how to fight, and adapting to later hardship

这对人类来说也是真理。蓄意的破坏和混乱不会使你变得坚强，它们也不会帮你更好的应对世界范围内的恐怖活动。温柔的爱和关心使你坚强，因为它们给予你以学习、适宜（包括学习如何斗争适宜以后的艰难情形）的能量与力量。