《超越感觉》第六章：你的意见有多好？（75-76页）翻译
名人证言
我们看到越来越多的名人在商业广告和专题广告中为产品和服务背书。而且，当他们作为嘉宾在电台和电视脱口秀中出现时，他们被鼓励对当下新闻中发生的任何事情发表个人观点。不管那一天，你会听到歌星，演员、还有运动员讨论宗教、刑事审判、教育、经济、国际关系、竞选资金改革和心理学以及其他主题。例如，一个电视主持人曾经问过一个演员，“你认为宇宙中的机遇对于人生影响到因素有多大？”
你对著名艺人的尊重可能会引导你假设他们知道在访谈中说些什么。这个假设通常是错误的。他们可能消息灵通，或者他们不知不觉地被主持人的问题俘虏，不想看上去无知，随口说出出现在脑海里的任何想法。有些名人对自己的重要性印象深刻，因此认为不管说什么都是深刻的，没有其他原因，只是因为是他们说的！在推荐产品或者服务的案例中，名人收取了报酬去对他们知道一点或者完全不知道的产品发表意见。
评估名人证言，你要问，在这个广告或者专题广告中，这个名人是收取报酬的代言人吗？（这个通常在广告的底部用小小的字体显示出来）。在脱口秀的评论中，名人有没有就他或她的观点提供支持——例如，引用有资格人提供的研究？还有，主持人有没有问这样的支持？如果讨论只是由一些表达了名人没有支持的观点的断言组成，不管你现在对这个人有多欣赏，你最好不要全信他
专家意见
就像你可能期望的那样，专家意见通常比绝大多数我们目前所考虑的各种不同证据更可靠。相比个人经验的优势是，专家意见通常能解决典型和非典型的关键问题。尽管如此，专家意见也不是一直可靠。不可靠的最重要原因是几乎每个领域的知识都在快速增加。一个世纪前，获得超过一个学科的专业技能是可能的。今天的典型学者只在一个学科的单一狭窄方面拥有专业技能，并且难以在这方面获得进一步重大的发展。不幸的是，有些人无法抗拒将自己认为是所有方面专家的诱惑。 比如，一位著名的天文学家，曾在流行杂志上写文章，并就伦理学、人类学和神学发表意见。
评价专家意见，你要问：除了被提及的广泛领域的资历外，此人是否在所讨论的特定问题上具有特定的专业知识？对于该领域外的人来说，这通常不容易查清楚，但是一个好的迹象是，这个人不仅仅陈述了他或她的意见，而且通过引用当下的研究作为支持。还要问这专家是否得到报酬。接受金钱并不一定会影响专家的意见，但是会增加对这个人客观性的质疑。最后，询问其他权威同意或者不同意这个专家的意见。
实验
概括讲，有两种不同类型实验。实验室的实验可以让研究者制定不同的条件，然后更加精确的识别原因和结果。但是，实验室实验的弱点是它的非自然性。田野调查具备在自然背景的优点，但是研究员的存在会影响实验对象并扭曲发现。
评估实验证据，你要问，对于实验室的实验，有没有被其他研究者重复？对于田野调查，有没有其他研究者独立确认了这个发现？如果没有成功的重复实验或者确认发现，最好推迟接受实验的发现结论。
原文：
CELEBRITY TESTIMONY
Increasingly, celebrities are seen endorsing products and services in commercials and infomercials. In addition, when they appear as guests on radio and television talk shows, they are encouraged to state their personal views about whatever happens to be in the news at the time. On any given day you may hear singers, actors, and athletes discussing religion, criminal justice, education, economics, international relations, campaign finance reform, and psychology, among other topics. For example, a TV host once asked an actor, “How big a factor in human life do you believe is chance in the universe?”
Your respect for celebrities as entertainers may lead you to assume that they know what they are talking about in interviews. This assumption is often mistaken. They may be very well informed. Or they may have been caught unawares by the host’s question and, not wanting to seem ignorant, uttered whatever happened to come to mind. Some celebrities may be so impressed with their own importance that they imagine whatever they say is profound for no other reason than that they say it! In the case of testimonials for products or services, the celebrities may have been paid to say things about products that they know little or nothing about.
To evaluate celebrity testimony, ask, In the case of advertisements or infomercials, is the celebrity a paid spokesperson? (This is often indicated in small print at the end of the ad.) In the case of talk show comments, does the celebrity offer any support for his or her views—for example, citing research conducted by qualified people? Also, does the host ask for such support? If the discussion consists of little more than a series of assertions expressing the celebrity’s unsupported opinion, you would do well to discount it no matter now much you may admire the person.
EXPERT OPINION
As you might expect, expert opinion is generally more reliable than most of the varieties of evidence we have considered so far. The advantage it enjoys over personal experience is that it can usually address the crucial question of what is typical and what is not. Nevertheless, not even expert opinion is consistently reliable. The most significant reason for unreliability is that knowledge in virtually every field is rapidly expanding. Acentury ago it was possible to gain expertise in more than one discipline. Today’s scholars typically have expertise in a single narrow aspect of one discipline and may have difficulty keeping abreast of significant developments in that one. Unfortunately, some people can’t resist the temptation to think of themselves as experts in everything. Awell-known astronomer, for example, used to write articles in popular magazines and offer his opinions on ethics, anthropology, and theology.
To evaluate expert opinion, ask, Does the person have, in addition to credentials in the broad field in question, specific expertise in the particular issue under discussion? This is not always easy to ascertain by those outside the field, but one good indication is that the person does not just state his or her opinion but also supports it with references to current research. Also ask whether the expert was paid. The acceptance of money does not necessarily taint expert opinion, but it may raise questions about the person’s objectivity. Finally, ask whether other authorities agree or disagree with the expert’s view.
EXPERIMENT
There are two broad types of experiments. The laboratory experiment enables researchers to vary the conditions and thereby identify causes and effects more precisely. One disadvantage of the laboratory experiment, however, is its artificiality. The field experiment has the advantage of occurring in a natural setting, but the presence of the researchers can influence the subjects and distort the findings.
To evaluate experimental evidence, ask, For a laboratory experiment, has it been replicated by other researchers? For a field experiment, have other researchers independently confirmed the findings? If replication or confirmation has been unsuccessfully attempted, it is best to postpone your acceptance of the experiment’s findings.
