从数据到智慧

罗素·阿克夫[1]

一盎司信息抵得上一磅数据。

一盎司知识抵得上一磅信息。

一盎司理解抵得上一磅知识。

学校教育的大部分时间都用于传递信息及获取信息的方法，较少时间用于传递知识及获取知识的方法（分析性思维），而用于传递理解或培养理解能力（综合性思维）的时间几乎为零。此外，教育过程中很少区分数据、信息乃至更高层级的智慧，导致学生意识不到自己的无知——他们不仅“不知道”，甚至“不知道自己不知道什么”。

---

数据是表征对象和事件属性的符号。信息是经过处理的数据，处理的目的是提升其效用。例如，人口普查员收集数据，而人口普查局通过处理将这些数据转化为信息，并呈现在《统计摘要》的各类表格中。和数据一样，信息也表征对象和事件的属性，但更简洁、更有用。数据与信息的区别是功能性的，而非结构性的。

信息蕴含在“描述”中，回答“是谁、是什么、何时、何地、多少”这类问题；
知识通过“指令”传递，回答“如何做”的问题；
理解则通过“解释”传达，回答“为什么”的问题。

信息、知识和理解能提升效率，而非效能。行为的效率通过“既定目标下所需资源的量”或“既定资源下达成目标的概率”来衡量，而效能是“经价值评估的效率”，即效率乘以目标的价值。效能关乎目标本身的优劣。

智能是提升效率的能力，智慧是提升效能的能力。

效率与效能的差异——也是智慧与理解、知识、信息及数据的根本区别——体现在“增长”与“发展”的不同。增长无需价值提升，但发展需要。因此，发展既需要智慧，也需要理解、知识和信息的积累。

智慧涉及价值判断，需依托人的主观能动性。效率评估可基于逻辑编程并自动化，但效能的价值判断永远无法脱离判断者自身。

---

由此我断言：尽管我们能开发生成信息、知识和理解的计算机系统，却永远无法用这类系统生成智慧。或许，智慧——这种追求理想或终极价值目标的能力——正是人类与机器的本质区别。仅此一点，教育过程就应像培养智能一样，投入同等精力去培养和锻炼智慧。

遗憾的是，学校教育不仅对理解和智慧的培养几无贡献，甚至在数据收集和信息生成方面也成效寥寥。数据收集及其向信息的转化蕴含大量精妙之处，而教育过程极少揭示这些精妙。大多数人只能通过艰难实践去领悟。

——摘自阿克夫《阿克夫精选集》（1999年，约翰威立出版社，第170-172页）

---

译文说明1：保留原文类比式标题，通过短句拆分和术语对照（如“efficiency/effectiveness”译为“效率/效能”）确保学术准确性，同时用“精妙之处”“本质区别”等短语强化阿克夫的语言风格。

译文说明2：更多对 DIKW 的讨论，请参考 David Williams 的文章 Models, Metaphors and Symbols for Information and Knowledge Systems

---

英文原文

From Data to Wisdom

Russell Ackoff[1]

An ounce of information is worth a pound of data.

An ounce of knowledge is worth a pound of information.

An ounce of understanding is worth a pound of knowledge.

Most of the time spent in school is devoted to the transmission of information and ways of obtaining it. Less time is devoted to the transmission of knowledge and ways of obtaining it (analytic thinking). Virtually no time is spent in transmitting understanding or ways of obtaining it (synthetic thinking). Furthermore, the distinction between data, information, and so on up to wisdom are seldom made in the educational process, leaving students unaware of their ignorance. They not only don’t know, they don’t know what they don’t know.

Data are symbols that represent the properties of objects and events. Information consists of processed data, the processing directed at increasing its usefulness. For example, census takers collect data. The Bureau of the Census processes that data, converting it into information that is presented in the numerous tables published in the Statistical Abstracts. Like data, information also represents the properties of objects and events, but it does so more compactly and usefully than data. The difference between data and information is functional, not structural.

Information is contained in descriptions, answers to questions that begin with such words as who, what, when, where, and how many. Knowledge is conveyed by instructions, answers to how-to questions. Understanding is conveyed by explanations, answers to why questions.

Information, knowledge, and understanding enable us to increase efficiency, not effectiveness. The efficiency of behavior or an act is measured relative to an objective by determining either the amount of resources required to obtain that objective with a specified probability, or the probability of obtaining that objective with a specified amount of resources. The value of the objective(s) pursued is not relevant in determining efficiency, but it is relevant in determining effectiveness. Effectiveness is evaluated efficiency. It is efficiency multiplied by value, efficiency for a valued outcome.

Intelligence is the ability to increase efficiency; wisdom is the ability to increase effectiveness.

The difference between efficiency and effectiveness—that which differentiates wisdom from understanding, knowledge, information, and data—is reflected in the difference between development and growth. Growth does not require an increase in value; development does. Therefore, development requires an increase in wisdom as well as understanding, knowledge, and information.

Wisdom deals with values. It involves the exercise of judgment. Evaluations of efficiency are all based on a logic that, in principle, can be programmed into a computer and automated. These evaluative principles are impersonal. We can speak of the efficiency of an act independently of the actor. Not so for effectiveness. A judgment of the value of an act is never independent of the judge, and seldom is the same for two judges.

From all this I infer that although we are able to develop computerized information-, knowledge-, and understanding-generating systems, we will never be able to generate wisdom by such systems. It may well be that wisdom—which is essential for the pursuit of ideals or ultimately valued ends—is the characteristic that differentiates man from machines. For this reason, if no other, the educational process should allocate as much time to the development and exercise of wisdom as it does to the development and exercise of intelligence.

Not only does schooling do little or nothing about the generation of understanding and the development of wisdom, it does little about even the collection of data and the generation of information. There are great subtleties involved in the collection of data and its conversion into information. Most of these subtleties are not revealed in the education process. Most of us have to learn them the hard way.

[1] Ackoff, R. L. (1999) Ackoff’s Best. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp 170 – 172.