福州大學（Fuzhou University），簡稱福大，創建于1958年，是國家“世界一流學科建設高校”，國家“211工程”重點建設高校，國家教育部、國家國防科技工業局與福建省人民政府共建高校，福建省三所重點建設的高水平大學之一，福建省一流， 以下是為大家整理的關于美國斯坦福大學排名4篇 , 供大家參考選擇。
美國斯坦福大學排名4篇
【篇一】美國斯坦福大學排名
斯坦福大學（Stanford University），全名小利蘭·斯坦福大學（Leland Stanford Junior University），簡稱斯坦福（Stanford），位于美國加州舊金山灣區南部的帕拉阿圖市（Palo Alto），臨近世界著名高科技園區硅谷，是世界著名私立研究型大學。斯坦福占地8180英畝（約33平方公里），是美國面積第六大的大學。
立思辰留學360介紹，學術方面，斯坦福大學與同在舊金山灣區的加州大學伯克利分校共同構成了美國西部的學術中心。據相關機構統計，截止至2015年共有60位諾貝爾獎得主在斯坦福大學工作或學習過，位列世界第八；而據泰晤士高等教育官方統計，斯坦福大學在21世紀獲得諾貝爾獎人數位居世界第一。截止2016年3月，有20位斯坦福校友或教授獲得圖靈獎（計算機最高獎），與伯克利（20位）并列世界第一；另有6位斯坦福教授（2位現役）獲得菲爾茲獎（數學最高獎）。2015-16年，斯坦福大學在ARWU世界大學學術排名中位列世界第二，在QS和泰晤士高等教育世界大學排名中均位列世界第三，在usnews世界大學排名中位列世界第四。
斯坦福大學培養了眾多高科技產品的領導者及創業精神的人才，這其中就包括惠普、谷歌、雅虎、耐克、羅技、特斯拉汽車、Firefox、藝電、太陽微系統、NVIDIA、思科、硅谷圖形及eBay等公司的創辦人，校友涵蓋30名富豪企業家及17名太空員，亦為培養最多美國國會成員的院校之一。根據美國《福布斯》雜志2010年盤點的億萬富翁最多的大學，斯坦福大學名列第二，億萬富翁數量達28位，僅次于哈佛大學。
硅谷之父
斯坦福的騰飛，是七十年代之后的事，這還得歸功于斯坦福面積大，八千多英畝的面積，學校可用的空間面積很大，于是一九五九年工程學院院長特曼（Frederick Terman）提出了一個構想——這便是斯坦福大學的轉折點：將一千英畝以極低廉、只具象征性的地租，長期租給工商業界或畢業校友設立公司，再由他們與學校合作，提供各種研究項目和學生實習機會。斯坦福成為美國首家在校園內成立工業園區的大學。得益于拿出土地換來的巨大收獲這個建議，斯坦福使自己置身于在美國的前沿：“工業園區內企業一家接一家地開張，不久就超出斯坦福能提供的土地范圍，向外發展擴張，形成美國加州科技尖端、精英云集的“硅谷（Silicon Valley，也譯作“矽谷）。斯坦福大學被科技集團與企業重重包圍，與高科技、與商界更與實用主義和開拓精神這些典型的“美國精神建立密切的聯系。隨著美國西海岸“高科技帶的興起，各個電腦公司，包括“世紀寵兒微軟公司紛紛在這一線安營扎寨，斯坦福大學的地位越來越舉足輕重，從此斯坦福大學就是硅谷的核心，是全世界科技創新的中心。
【篇二】美國斯坦福大學排名
斯坦福大學
Stanford University
基本情況：
斯坦福大學是一所四年制私立大學，被《美國新聞與世界報道》評為全美第5名明星級大學，也是世界上最杰出的大學之一。它位于加利福尼亞州的斯坦福市，臨近舊金山。斯坦福大學擁有的資產屬于世界大學中最大的之一，占地35平方公里，是美國面積第二大的大學。
排名情況：
全美綜合排名第5
部分專業排名：
工程 第2，教育 第2，商科 前3，法學 第1，計算機科學 第1（與卡內吉·梅隆大學、麻省理工學院、加州大學伯克利分校并列），地質學 第3，數學 第3（與普林斯頓大學、加州大學伯克利分校并列），物理學 第3（與哈佛大學、普林斯頓大學、加州大學伯克利分校并列），應用數學第4，化學第5。
優勢專業：
醫科、電子 / 電機工程、環境工程、統計學、石油工程、能源與資源工程、生物化學、機械工程、計算機工程、工業工程、運籌學、航天工程、數學、化學、物理、地質科學、化學工程、土木工程
開設的課程，學制及開學時間：
本科、研究生，每年1月、8月開學
獎學金：
可以遞交申請的時候同時申請獎學金
錄取條件：
GPA 3.90，托福90分以上，SAT1350以上
費用情況：
學費/年約為32994美元，一年總費用在52866 美元左右
住宿：
校內住宿、寄宿家庭、校外租房等
【篇三】美國斯坦福大學排名
斯坦福大學費用
斯坦福大學在2014年Usnews最新美國大學綜合排名第5名，被認為是世界上最杰出的大學之一。斯坦福大學擁有的資產屬于世界大學中最大的之一，學校圖書館藏有超過670萬本書籍及4萬多本期刊，校內另設有七千多部電腦供學生去使用。
目前斯坦福每年招收1600-1700新生，總共有本科生7000左右，而來自上述低收入的家庭的學生大概有1100名，斯坦福因此每年要減少3000萬美元的學費收入。校方稱，斯坦福大學此舉的目的是為了吸引更多優秀但是家境貧寒的學生。據悉哈佛大學、普林斯頓等私立大學也開始采取同樣的方式來吸引更多低收入家庭的學生。
*總費用：
25-40萬人民幣學費：
*申請費
1300元人民幣(150美元)
*食宿費用
10-15萬人民幣
*住宿安置費
5萬人民幣左右
*生活費
5-8萬人民幣
其中：A.研究生課程學費：20萬人民幣左右B.本科課程學費：20萬人民幣左右
實際上，說到斯坦福大學就必然會聯系斯坦福研究園區和“硅谷”。很多早期的帕洛·阿爾托的工程師都是斯坦福大學的畢業生。但1920年斯坦福大學還只是一所“鄉村大學，到了1960年她便名列前茅，到1985年更被評為全美大學的第一名。是斯坦福大學的崛起為硅谷微電子工業創造了條件，硅谷是世界最先進人才和最尖端技術的聚集地，在這里，共有40多個諾貝爾獎獲得者，有上千個科學院和工程院院士。硅谷的發展也尤為迅猛。1998年，硅谷地區的GDP總值約為2400億美元，占美國全國的3%左右，相當于中國GDP總值的25%左右。但到了2000年，硅谷地區的GDP總值已超過5000億美元，相當于當年中國GDP總值的50%。可以說，硅谷是當時美國經濟的助推器。硅谷取得的這些驕人業績，都離不開斯坦福大學這個孵化器，同時，硅谷的發展也幫助了斯坦福大學，使她得以有今天的成就。
在回顧斯坦福大學與硅谷相得益彰的關系時，我們不得不關注連接斯坦福大學和硅谷的橋梁--斯坦福研究園區。斯坦福研究園區是由斯坦福大學副校長特曼教授于1951年創建的，是世界上第一個研究園區，被譽為“研究園區之父。四十年代后期以來，由于聯邦政府決定加大對教育的投資，美國的教育得到復蘇。對當時偏于一隅的斯坦福來說，與東部的名牌大學是無法相提并論的，同時西部遠不如東部發達，且人才流失嚴重。當時的斯坦福大學副校長特曼教授認為，高校的未來在于人才。在他看來，“大學不僅是求知的處所，它們對一個國家工業的發展、工業的布局、人口的密度和所在地區的聲望，都可以發揮巨大的經濟影響，而且要成為第一流的大學，必須有第一流的教授。但當時的斯坦福對名牌教授并沒有吸引力。為此，特曼提出了他的“學術尖端的構想，這包含兩層意思，一是吸引頂尖人才。“只要有好的教授，他們就會吸引政府的投資，也會吸引研究生和有發展潛力的年輕人，使學校興旺發達。其實，這也是特曼教授的一個預見：努力提高斯坦福的聲譽和實力，以在未來不遠的政府投資中獲取盡可能多的教育經費。特曼教授“學術尖端構想的另一層意思就是樹立若干學術上的頂尖科系。正是基于以上招攬出色人才和造就尖端科系的“學術尖端構想，特曼教授和當時的校長華萊士·斯德林(WallaceSterling)決定把斯坦福的土地變成金錢，而把錢——通過聘請著名教授——變成了學術上的威望。他們的辦法就是如此簡單，出租土地為學校掙錢。在原來老斯坦福的贈予書內，寫明了這些饋贈的土地(斯坦福校區)不許出售，但沒有禁止出租。所以，他們就劃出7.5%的校園土地，約655英畝，出租給從事高科技產業的工廠，這便是后來的斯坦福工業園區。
斯坦福不僅吸引了學術人才和創業能手。同時，研究園區對學術市場化的操作模式還衍生了一種有利于新企業萌生的經濟環境，正是這種高科技、高風險但高利潤的經濟環境在吸引著各種各樣的創業者。由于研究園區把大學的智力和工業界的財力結合了起來，其所產生的巨大的生產力，已經引起政府的重視。美國國家科學基金會設立了實施“小企業創新研究計劃的機構。該計劃有助于小企業、新興企業得到私人投資和其他來源的研究和開發資助，以及鼓勵它們與大學、政府機構或大公司簽訂工作協議。此外，州政府還以冒險資本計劃和允許發行免稅工業集資債券，以支持小企業的開辦。總之，創業者可以得到許多方面的財政和政策支持，特別是硅谷地區提供風險資本的優越條件，是斯坦福研究園區的成功因素之一，是研究園區推動整個硅谷發展的核心動力。
【篇四】美國斯坦福大學排名
斯坦福大學演講：別在不斷優秀中淪落平庸
What Are You Going to Do With That?
教育為何？
By William Deresiewicz
The question my title poses, of course, is the one that is classically aimed at humanities majors. What practical value could there possibly be in studying literature or art or philosophy? So you must be wondering why I"m bothering to raise it here, at Stanford, this renowned citadel of science and technology. What doubt can there be that the world will offer you many opportunities to use your degree?
我的題目提出的問題，當然，是一個傳統地面向人文科學的專業所提出的問題：學習文學、藝術或哲學能有什么實效價值（practical value）？你肯定納悶，我為什么在以科技堡壘而聞名的斯坦福提出這個問題呢？大學學位給人帶來眾多機會，這還有什么需要質疑的嗎？
But that"s not the question I"m asking. By "do" I don"t mean a job, and by "that" I don"t mean your major. We are more than our jobs, and education is more than a major. Education is more than college, more even than the totality of your formal schooling, from kindergarten through graduate school. By "What are you going to do," I mean, what kind of life are you going to lead? And by "that," I mean everything in your training, formal and informal, that has brought you to be sitting here today, and everything you"re going to be doing for the rest of the time that you"re in school.
但那不是我提出的問題。這里的“做（do）”并不是指工作，“那（that）”并不是指你的專業。我們不僅僅是我們的工作，教育的全部也不僅僅是一門主修專業。教育也不僅僅是上大學，甚至也不僅是從幼兒園到研究生院的正規學校教育。我說的“你要做什么”的意思是你要過什么樣的生活。我所說的“那”指的是你得到的正規或非正規的任何訓練，那些把你送到這里來的東西，你在學校的剩余時間里將要做的任何事。
We should start by talking about how you did, in fact, get here.
我們不妨先來討論你是如何考入斯坦福的吧。
You got here by getting very good at a certain set of skills. Your parents pushed you to excel from the time you were very young. They sent you to good schools, where the encouragement of your teachers and the example of your peers helped push you even harder. Your natural aptitudes were nurtured so that, in addition to excelling in all your subjects, you developed a number of specific interests that you cultivated with particular vigor. You did extracurricular activities, went to afterschool programs, took private lessons. You spent summers doing advanced courses at a local college or attending skill-specific camps and workshops. You worked hard, you paid attention, and you tried your very best. And so you got very good at math, or piano, or lacrosse, or, indeed, several things at once.
你能進入這所大學說明你在某些技能上非常出色。你的父母在你很小的時候就鼓勵你追求卓越。他們送你到好學校，老師的鼓勵和同伴的榜樣激勵你更努力地學習。除了在所有課程上都出類拔萃之外，你還注重修養的提高，充滿熱情地培養了一些特殊興趣。你用幾個暑假在本地大學里預習大學課程，或參加專門技能的夏令營或訓練營。你學習刻苦、精力集中、全力以赴。所以，你在數學、鋼琴、曲棍球等眾多方面都很出色。
Now there"s nothing wrong with mastering skills, with wanting to do your best and to be the best. What"s wrong is what the system leaves out: which is to say, everything else. I don"t mean that by choosing to excel in math, say, you are failing to develop your verbal abilities to their fullest extent, or that in addition to focusing on geology, you should also focus on political science, or that while you"re learning the piano, you should also be working on the flute. It is the nature of specialization, after all, to be specialized. No, the problem with specialization is that it narrows your attention to the point where all you know about and all you want to know about, and, indeed, all you can know about, is your specialty.
掌握這些技能當然沒有錯，全力以赴成為最優秀的人也沒有錯。錯誤之處在于這個體系遺漏的地方：即任何別的東西。我并不是說因為選擇鉆研數學，所以你的語文能力沒得到充分發展；也不是說除了集中精力學習地質學之外，你還應該研究政治學；也不是說你在學習鋼琴時還應該學吹笛子。畢竟，專業化的本質就是要專業性。可是，專業化的問題在于它把你的注意力限制在一個點上，你所已知的和你想探知的東西都限界于此。真的，你能知道的一切就只是你的專業了。
The problem with specialization is that it makes you into a specialist. It cuts you off, not only from everything else in the world, but also from everything else in yourself. And of course, as college freshmen, your specialization is only just beginning. In the journey toward the success that you all hope to achieve, you have completed, by getting into Stanford, only the first of many legs. Three more years of college, three or four or five years of law school or medical school or a Ph.D. program, then residencies or postdocs or years as a junior associate. In short, an ever-narrowing funnel of specialization. You go from being a political-science major to being a lawyer to being a corporate attorney to being a corporate attorney focusing on taxation issues in the consumer-products industry. You go from being a biochemistry major to being a doctor to being a cardiologist to being a cardiac surgeon who performs heart-valve replacements.
專業化的問題是它讓你成為專家，切斷你與世界上其他任何東西的聯系，不僅如此，還切斷你與自身其他潛能的聯系。當然，作為大一新生，你的專業才剛剛開始。在你走向所渴望的成功之路的過程中，進入斯坦福是你踏上的眾多階梯中的一個。再讀三年大學，三五年法學院或醫學院或博士，然后再干若干年住院實習生或博士后或助理教授。總而言之，進入越來越狹窄的專業化軌道。你可能從政治學專業的學生變成了律師或者公司代理人，再變成專門研究消費品領域的稅收問題的公司代理人。你從生物化學專業的學生變成了博士，再變成心臟病學家，再變成專門做心臟瓣膜移植的心臟病醫生。
Again, there"s nothing wrong with being those things. It"s just that, as you get deeper and deeper into the funnel, into the tunnel, it becomes increasingly difficult to remember who you once were. You start to wonder what happened to that person who played piano and lacrosse and sat around with her friends having intense conversations about life and politics and all the things she was learning in her classes. The 19-year-old who could do so many things, and was interested in so many things, has become a 40-year-old who thinks about only one thing. That"s why older people are so boring. "Hey, my dad"s a smart guy, but all he talks about is money and livers."
再次，做這些事沒有任何錯。只不過，在你越來越深入地進入這個軌道后，再記得你最初的樣子就益發困難了。你開始懷念那個曾經談鋼琴和打曲棍球的人，思考那個曾經和朋友熱烈討論人生和政治以及在課堂內容的人在做什么。那個活潑能干的19歲年輕人已經變成了只想一件事的40歲中年人。難怪年長的人這么乏味無趣。“哎，我爸爸曾經是非常聰明的人，但他現在除了談論錢和肝臟外再無其他。”
And there"s another problem. Maybe you never really wanted to be a cardiac surgeon in the first place. It just kind of happened. It"s easy, the way the system works, to simply go with the flow. I don"t mean the work is easy, but the choices are easy. Or rather, the choices sort of make themselves. You go to a place like Stanford because that"s what smart kids do. You go to medical school because it"s prestigious. You specialize in cardiology because it"s lucrative. You do the things that reap the rewards, that make your parents proud, and your teachers pleased, and your friends impressed. From the time you started high school and maybe even junior high, your whole goal was to get into the best college you could, and so now you naturally think about your life in terms of "getting into" whatever"s next. "Getting into" is validation; "getting into" is victory. Stanford, then Johns Hopkins medical school, then a residency at the University of San Francisco, and so forth. Or Michigan Law School, or Goldman Sachs, or Mc-Kinsey, or whatever. You take it one step at a time, and the next step always seems to be inevitable.
還有另外一個問題。或許你從來沒有想過當心臟病醫生，只是碰巧發生了而已。隨大流最容易，這就是體制的力量。我不是說這個工作容易，而是說做出這種選擇很容易。或者，這些根本就不是自己做出的選擇。你來到斯坦福這樣的名牌大學是因為聰明的孩子都這樣。你考入醫學院是因為它的地位高，人人都羨慕。你選擇心臟病學是因為當心臟病醫生的待遇很好。你做那些事能給你帶來好處，讓你的父母感到驕傲，令你的老師感到高興，也讓朋友們羨慕。從你上高中開始，甚至初中開始，你的唯一目標就是進入最好的大學，所以現在你會很自然地從“進入下個階段”的角度看待人生。“進入”就是能力的證明，“進入”就是勝利。先進入斯坦福，然后是約翰霍普金斯醫學院，再進入舊金山大學做實習醫生等。或者進入密歇根法學院，或高盛集團或麥肯錫公司或別的什么地方。你邁出了這一步，下一步似乎就必然在等著你。
Or maybe you did always want to be a cardiac surgeon. You dreamed about it from the time you were 10 years old, even though you had no idea what it really meant, and you stayed on course for the entire time you were in school. You refused to be enticed from your path by that great experience you had in AP history, or that trip you took to Costa Rica the summer after your junior year in college, or that terrific feeling you got taking care of kids when you did your rotation in pediatrics during your fourth year in medical school.
也許你確實想當心臟病學家。十歲時就夢想成為醫生，即使你根本不知道醫生意味著什么。你在上學期間全身心都在朝著這個目標前進。你拒絕了上大學預修歷史課時的美妙體驗的誘惑，也無視你在醫學院第四年的兒科學輪流值班時照看孩子的可怕感受。
But either way, either because you went with the flow or because you set your course very early, you wake up one day, maybe 20 years later, and you wonder what happened: how you got there, what it all means. Not what it means in the "big picture," whatever that is, but what it means to you. Why you"re doing it, what it"s all for. It sounds like a cliché, this "waking up one day," but it"s called having a midlife crisis, and it happens to people all the time.
不管是什么，要么因為你隨大流，要么因為你早就選定了道路，20年后某天醒來，你或許會納悶到底發生了什么：你怎么變成現在這個樣子，這一切意味著什么。不是它是什么，不在于它是否是“大藍圖”而是它對你意味著什么。你為什么做它？到底為了什么？這聽起來像老生常談，但這個被稱為中年危機的“有一天醒來”一直就發生在每個人身上。
There is an alternative, however, and it may be one that hasn"t occurred to you. Let me try to explain it by telling you a story about one of your peers, and the alternative that hadn"t occurred to her. A couple of years ago, I participated in a panel discussion at Harvard that dealt with some of these same matters, and afterward I was contacted by one of the students who had come to the event, a young woman who was writing her senior thesis about Harvard itself, how it instills in its students what she called self-efficacy, the sense that you can do anything you want. Self-efficacy, or, in more familiar terms, self-esteem. There are some kids, she said, who get an A on a test and say, "I got it because it was easy." And there are other kids, the kind with self-efficacy or self-esteem, who get an A on a test and say, "I got it because I"m smart."
不過，還有另外一種情況，或許中年危機并不會發生在你身上。讓我告訴你們一個同伴的故事來解釋我的意思吧，還有一個她沒有遇到過的可能。幾年前，我在哈佛參加了一次小組討論會，談到這些問題。后來參加這次討論的一個學生給我聯系，這個哈佛學生正在寫有關哈佛的畢業論文，討論哈佛是如何給學生灌輸她所說的“自我效能”，一種相信自己能做一切的意識。自我效能或更熟悉的說法“自我尊重”。她說有些在考試中得了優秀的有些學生會說“我得優秀是因為試題很簡單。” 但另外一些學生，那種具有自我效能感或自我尊重的學生，考試得了優秀會說“我得優秀是因為我聰明。”
Again, there"s nothing wrong with thinking that you got an A because you"re smart. But what that Harvard student didn"t realize—and it was really quite a shock to her when I suggested it—is that there is a third alternative. True self-esteem, I proposed, means not caring whether you get an A in the first place. True self-esteem means recognizing, despite everything that your upbringing has trained you to believe about yourself, that the grades you get—and the awards, and the test scores, and the trophies, and the acceptance letters—are not what defines who you are.
再說一遍，認為得了優秀是因為自己聰明的想法并沒有任何錯，不過，哈佛學生沒有認識到的是他們沒有第三種選擇。當我指出這一點時， 她十分震驚。我指出，真正的自尊意味著最初根本就不在乎成績是否優秀。真正的自尊意味著對此問題的足夠認識：盡管你在成長過程中的一切都在教導你要相信自 己，但你所等獲得的成績，還有那些獎勵、成績、獎品、錄取通知書等所有這一切，都不能來定義你是誰。
She also claimed, this young woman, that Harvard students take their sense of self-efficacy out into the world and become, as she put it, "innovative." But when I asked her what she meant by innovative, the only example she could come up with was "being CEO of a Fortune 500." That"s not innovative, I told her, that"s just successful, and successful according to a very narrow definition of success. True innovation means using your imagination, exercising the capacity to envision new possibilities.
她還說，這個年輕的女孩子說哈佛學生把他們的自我效能帶到了世界上，如她所說的“創新”。但當我問她“創新”意味著什么時，她能夠想到的唯一例子不過是“世界大公司五百強的首席執行官”。我告訴她這不是創新，這只是成功，而且是狹義的成功而已。真正的創新意味著運用你的想象力，發揮你的潛力，創造新的可能性。
But I"m not here to talk about technological innovation, I"m here to talk about a different kind. It"s not about inventing a new machine or a new drug. It"s about inventing your own life. Not following a path, but making your own path. The kind of imagination I"m talking about is moral imagination. "Moral" meaning not right or wrong, but having to do with making choices. Moral imagination means the capacity to envision new ways to live your life.
但這里我并不是在談論技術創新，不是發明新機器或者制造一種新藥，我談論的是另外一種創新，是創造你自己的生活。不是走現成的道路，而是創造一條屬于自己的道路。我談論的想象力是道德想象力（moral imagination：心理學專業名詞）。“道德”在這里無關對錯，而是與選擇有關。道德想象力意味著創造自己新生的能力。
It means not just going with the flow. It means not just "getting into" whatever school or program comes next. It means figuring out what you want for yourself, not what your parents want, or your peers want, or your school wants, or your society wants. Originating your own values. Thinking your way toward your own definition of success. Not simply accepting the life that you"ve been handed. Not simply accepting the choices you"ve been handed. When you walk into Starbucks, you"re offered a choice among a latte and a macchiato and an espresso and a few other things, but you can also make another choice. You can turn around and walk out. When you walk into college, you are offered a choice among law and medicine and investment banking and consulting and a few other things, but again, you can also do something else, something that no one has thought of before.
它意味著不隨波逐流，不是下一步要“進入”什么名牌大學或研究生院。而是要弄清楚自己到底想要什么，而不是父母、同伴、 學校、或社會想要什么。即確認你自己的價值觀，思考邁向自己所定義的成功的道路，而不僅僅是接受別人給你的生活，不僅僅是接受別人給你的選擇。當今走進星巴克咖啡館，服務員可能讓你在牛奶咖啡、加糖咖啡、特制咖啡等幾樣東西之間做出選擇。但你可以做出另外的選擇，你可以轉身走出去。當你進入大學，人家給你眾多選擇，或法律或醫學或投資銀行和咨詢以及其他，但你同樣也可以做其他事，做從前根本沒有人想過的事。
Let me give you another counterexample. I wrote an essay a couple of years ago that touched on some of these same points. I said, among other things, that kids at places like Yale or Stanford tend to play it safe and go for the conventional rewards. And one of the most common criticisms I got went like this: What about Teach for America? Lots of kids from elite colleges go and do TFA after they graduate, so therefore I was wrong. TFA, TFA—I heard that over and over again. And Teach for America is undoubtedly a very good thing. But to cite TFA in response to my argument is precisely to miss the point, and to miss it in a way that actually confirms what I"m saying. The problem with TFA—or rather, the problem with the way that TFA has become incorporated into the system—is that it"s just become another thing to get into.
讓我再舉一個反面的例子。幾年前我寫過一篇涉及同類問題的文章。我說，那些在耶魯和斯坦福這類名校的孩子往往比較謹慎，去追求一些穩妥的獎勵。我得到的最常見的批評是：教育項目“為美國而教”如何？從名校出來的很多學生畢業后很多參與這個教育項目，因此我的觀點是錯誤的。我一再聽到TFA這個術語。“為美國而教”當然是好東西，但引用這個項目來反駁我的觀點恰恰是不得要領，實際上正好證明了我想說的東西。“為美國而教”的問題 或者“為美國而教”已經成為體系一部分的問題，是它已經成為另外一個需要“進入”的門檻。
In terms of its content, Teach for America is completely different from Goldman Sachs or McKinsey or Harvard Medical School or Berkeley Law, but in terms of its place within the structure of elite expectations, of elite choices, it is exactly the same. It"s prestigious, it"s hard to get into, it"s something that you and your parents can brag about, it looks good on your résumé, and most important, it represents a clearly marked path. You don"t have to make it up yourself, you don"t have to do anything but apply and do the work-—just like college or law school or McKinsey or whatever. It"s the Stanford or Harvard of social engagement. It"s another hurdle, another badge. It requires aptitude and diligence, but it does not require a single ounce of moral imagination.
從其內容來看，“為美國而教”完全不同于高盛或者麥肯錫公司或哈佛醫學院或者伯克利法學院，但從它在未來精英體系中的地位來說，完全是一樣的。它享有盛名，很難進入，是值得你和父母夸耀的東西，如果寫在簡歷上會很好看，最重要的是，它代表了清晰標記的道路。你根本不用自己創造，什么都不用做，只需申請然后按要求做就行了，就像上大學或法學院或麥肯錫公司或別的什么。它是社會參與方面的斯坦福或哈佛，是另一個柵欄，另一枚獎章。該項目需要能力和勤奮，但不需要一丁點兒的道德想象力。
Moral imagination is hard, and it"s hard in a completely different way than the hard things you"re used to doing. And not only that, it"s not enough. If you"re going to invent your own life, if you"re going to be truly autonomous, you also need courage: moral courage. The courage to act on your values in the face of what everyone"s going to say and do to try to make you change your mind. Because they"re not going to like it. Morally courageous individuals tend to make the people around them very uncomfortable. They don"t fit in with everybody else"s ideas about the way the world is supposed to work, and still worse, they make them feel insecure about the choices that they themselves have made—or failed to make. People don"t mind being in prison as long as no one else is free. But stage a jailbreak, and everybody else freaks out.
道德想象力是困難的，這種困難與你已經習慣的困難完全不同。不僅如此，光有道德想象力還不夠。如果你要創造自己的生活，如果你 想成為真正的獨立思想者，你還需要勇氣：道德勇氣。不管別人說什么，有按自己的價值觀行動的勇氣，不會因為別人不喜歡而試圖改變自己的想法。具有道德勇氣的個人往往讓周圍的人感到不舒服。他們和其他人對世界的看法格格不入，更糟糕的是，讓別人對自己已經做出的選擇感到不安全或無法做出選擇。只要別人也不享受自由，人們就不在乎自己被關進監獄。可一旦有人越獄，其他人都會跟著跑出去。
In A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, James Joyce has Stephen Dedalus famously say, about growing up in Ireland in the late 19th century, "When the soul of a man is born in this country there are nets flung at it to hold it back from flight. You talk to me of nationality, language, religion. I shall try to fly by those nets."
在《青年藝術家的肖像》中，詹姆斯·喬伊斯讓主人公斯蒂芬·迪達勒斯就19世紀末期的愛爾蘭的成長環境說出了如下名言： “當一個人的靈魂誕生在這個國家時，有一張大網把它罩住，防止它飛翔。你跟我談論民族性、語言和宗教。我想沖出這些牢籠。”
Today there are other nets. One of those nets is a term that I"ve heard again and again as I"ve talked with students about these things. That term is "self-indulgent." "Isn"t it self-indulgent to try to live the life of the mind when there are so many other things I could be doing with my degree?" "Wouldn"t it be self-indulgent to pursue painting after I graduate instead of getting a real job?"
今天，我們面臨的是其它的網。其中之一是我在就這些問題與學生交流時經常聽到的一個術語“自我放任”。“在攻讀學位過程中有 這么多事要做的時候，試圖按照自己的感覺生活難道不是自我放任嗎？”“畢業后不去找個真正的工作而去畫畫難道不是自我放任嗎？”
These are the kinds of questions that young people find themselves being asked today if they even think about doing something a little bit different. Even worse, the kinds of questions they are made to feel compelled to ask themselves. Many students have spoken to me, as they navigated their senior years, about the pressure they felt from their peers—from their peers—to justify a creative or intellectual life. You"re made to feel like you"re crazy: crazy to forsake the sure thing, crazy to think it could work, crazy to imagine that you even have a right to try.
這些是年輕人只要思考一下稍稍出格的事就不由自主地質問自己的問題。更糟糕的是，他們覺得提出這些問題是理所應當的。許多學生在畢業前夕的未來探索中跟我說，他們感受到來自同伴那里的壓力，需要為創造性的生活或思想生活辯護。好像自己已經走火入魔了似的：瘋了般地拋棄確定無疑的東西，瘋了般地認為思想生活可行，瘋了般地想象你有嘗試的權利。
Think of what we"ve come to. It is one of the great testaments to the intellectual—and moral, and spiritual—poverty of American society that it makes its most intelligent young people feel like they"re being self-indulgent if they pursue their curiosity. You are all told that you"re supposed to go to college, but you"re also told that you"re being "self-indulgent" if you actually want to get an education. Or even worse, give yourself one. As opposed to what? Going into consulting isn"t self-indulgent? Going into finance isn"t self-indulgent? Going into law, like most of the people who do, in order to make yourself rich, isn"t self-indulgent? It"s not OK to play music, or write essays, because what good does that really do anyone, but it is OK to work for a hedge fund. It"s selfish to pursue your passion, unless it"s also going to make you a lot of money, in which case it"s not selfish at all.
想象我們現在面臨的局面。這是美國社會的貧困——思想、道德和精神貧困的最明顯癥狀，美國最聰明的年輕人竟然認為聽從自己的好奇心行動就是自我放任。你們得到的教導是應該上大學，但你們同時也被告知如果真的想得到教育，那就是“自我放任”。如果你自我教育的話，更糟糕。這是什么 道理？進入證券咨詢業是不是自我放任？進入金融業是不是自我放任？像許多人那樣進入律師界發財是不是自我放任？搞音樂，寫文章就不行，因為它不能給人帶來 利益。但為風險投資公司工作就可以。追求自己的理想和激情是自私的，除非它能讓你賺很多錢。那樣的話，就一點兒也不自私了。
Do you see how absurd this is? But these are the nets that are flung at you, and this is what I mean by the need for courage. And it"s a never-ending proc-ess. At that Harvard event two years ago, one person said, about my assertion that college students needed to keep rethinking the decisions they"ve made about their lives, "We already made our decisions, back in middle school, when we decided to be the kind of high achievers who get into Harvard." And I thought, who wants to live with the decisions that they made when they were 12? Let me put that another way. Who wants to let a 12-year-old decide what they"re going to do for the rest of their lives? Or a 19-year-old, for that matter?
你看到這些觀點是多么荒謬了嗎？這就是罩在你們身上的網，就是我說的需要勇氣的意思。這是永不停息的過程。在兩年前的哈 佛事件中，有個學生談到我說的大學生需要重新思考人生決定的觀點，他說“我們已經做出了決定，我們早在中學時就已經決定成為能夠進入哈佛的高材生。”我在 想，誰會打算按照他在12歲時做出的決定生活呢？讓我換一種說法，誰愿意讓一個12歲的孩子決定他們未來一輩子要做什么呢？或者一個19歲的小毛孩兒？
All you can decide is what you think now, and you need to be prepared to keep making revisions. Because let me be clear. I"m not trying to persuade you all to become writers or musicians. Being a doctor or a lawyer, a scientist or an engineer or an economist—these are all valid and admirable choices. All I"m saying is that you need to think about it, and think about it hard. All I"m asking is that you make your choices for the right reasons. All I"m urging is that you recognize and embrace your moral freedom.
你能做出的決定是你現在想什么，你需要準備好不斷修改自己的決定。讓我說得更明白一些。我不是在試圖說服你們都成為音樂家或者作家。成為醫生、律師、科學家、工程師或者經濟學家沒有什么不好，這些都是可靠的、可敬的選擇。我想說的是你需要思考它，認真地思考。我請求你們 做的，是根據正確的理由做出你的選擇。我在敦促你們的，是認識到你的道德自由并熱情擁抱它。
And most of all, don"t play it safe. Resist the seductions of the cowardly values our society has come to prize so highly: comfort, convenience, security, predictability, control. These, too, are nets. Above all, resist the fear of failure. Yes, you will make mistakes. But they will be your mistakes, not someone else"s. And you will survive them, and you will know yourself better for having made them, and you will be a fuller and a stronger person.
最重要的是，不要太過小心翼翼。去拒絕或否定我們社會給予了過高獎賞的那些卑怯的價值觀的誘惑：舒服、方便、安全、可預測 的、可控制的。這些，同樣是羅網。最重要的是，去拒否失敗的恐懼感。是的，你會犯錯誤。可那是你的錯誤，不是別人的。你將從錯誤中緩過來，而且，正是因為 這些錯誤，你更好地認識你自己。由此，你成為更完整和強大的人。
It"s been said—and I"m not sure I agree with this, but it"s an idea that"s worth taking seriously—that you guys belong to a "postemotional" generation. That you prefer to avoid messy and turbulent and powerful feelings. But I say, don"t shy away from the challenging parts of yourself. Don"t deny the desires and curiosities, the doubts and dissatisfactions, the joy and the darkness, that might knock you off the path that you have set for yourself. College is just beginning for you, adulthood is just beginning. Open yourself to the possibilities they represent. The world is much larger than you can imagine right now. Which means, you are much larger than you can imagine.
人們常說你們年輕人屬于“后情感”一代，我想我未必贊同這個說法，但這個說法值得嚴肅對待。你們更愿意規避混亂、動蕩 和強烈的感情，但我想說，不要回避挑戰自我，不要否認欲望和好奇心、懷疑和不滿、快樂和陰郁，它們可能改變你預設的人生軌跡。大學剛開始，成年時代也才剛 開始。打開自己，直面各種可能性吧。這個世界的深廣遠超你現在想象的邊際。這意味著，你自身的深廣也將遠超你現在的想象。
