Luyện nói tiếng Anh bằng Shadowing qua video: Why Is Everyone So Unhappy?

There has been a huge increase, at least in recorded incidents, of what we call mental illness, mental unwellness.

Nietzsche predicted, I think very accurately, that the end of belief would be trouble for human beings.

I am here with Alain de Botton.

Alain, thanks for joining me.

Thank you so much for having me.

So I think this conversation probably is, I don't know, two decades coming.

I feel like I've known about you for at least 20 years and admired your work from afar.

You've done many things.

You've written many books and you have the School of Life, which I would love to talk about.

But how do you describe your career at this point?

What is it that you focus on and how are you showing up mostly now as a thinker?

Sure.

I mean, I'm broadly interested in the slightly paradoxical and elusive sources of human happiness unhappiness,

sorry, that are not really related to material or political shortfalls or events, but broadly lie in the psychological space.

Our amazing human ability to make a hell out of often pretty benign circumstances.

I'm fascinated by, as I say, the knots we tie ourselves into.

And I write books.

I operate on YouTube.

As you say, I run this organization called the School of Life in London.

We're interested in emotional education.

And I'm also a psychotherapist.

So I see clients one day a week, as well as writing books and things.

And the School of Life has published many books.

Are you the author of those books? or did you?

I am.

I and a colleague are the author of all the books.

Yes.

Wow.

You are more prolific than you get credit for then.

How many books have you written?

There are a lot of them.

Well, the School of Life has 70 books under its brand and I've written 15 under my name.

So it's a little too much.

And I leave it to experts to diagnose what the problem might be.

This is L.

Ron Hubbard territory, though happily with much better content.

Wow.

Okay.

Well, then I'm glad to see you away from your keyboard for at least the hour that we're speaking.

Thank you.

Well, so, you know, see, you have focused on these timeless issues of, as you just put it,

that, you know, our capacity to suffer unnecessarily, that it's pretty easy to uncouple that from the historical moment.

I mean, there are ways in which current technology and And changes in culture,

I think, are amplifying that capacity and making it more difficult to be happy in some very ordinary ways.

Perhaps these changes are making it easier, too.

Let's just talk about culture for a moment.

What most concerns you about the cultural changes that we're seeing happening, you know, more or less,

you know, accelerating, you know, hour by hour around us now?

I wonder if I might start in an unusual, slightly unusual and slightly provocative place, which is with religion

and with the decline in much of the modern world with

what I would be careful to call a religious mindset as opposed to belief um

and i think it was still you know i still diagnose

um modern societies as coming out of the very long religious age

which preceded it um

and you know taking my cue from a thinker like who predicted i think very accurately

that the end of belief would be would be trouble for

human beings i mean it's not like there was no trouble

before um don't get me wrong there was a lot of trouble before as well, but that there were particular kinds of trouble that were going to beset non -religious eras,

predominantly non -religious eras.

And I think it's a good place to look.

I mean, let's look at some of the things that religious societies do and secular societies have problems with.

One of the things that religious societies do is to socialize in ritual forms, certain kinds of psychological transitions,

which secular societies have a lot of trouble orchestrating or putting on the agenda.

I mean, our diaries are filled with business meetings and technical priorities.

In the more religious eras, days were devoted to ideas, to priorities of the soul, if you like.

Now, one can have all kinds of objections to how those priorities were framed

but it's a very interesting way in which in the 19th century what happens is that

private life gets personalized and individualized to an unprecedented degree.

And so if you're in love, if you're struck by nature, if you're interested in community, if you're moved by the sight of mountains, et cetera, you do that on your own.

You're not within any kind of structure.

And we've had a hard time cohering people into structures that guide,

psychological, I guess when you might call health, religions talked of the soul.

We don't need to use that word soul, but it's a very interesting word.

Let me just explore that in the current context.

I mean, there are religious societies or large communities now

that you envy for their the degree to

which their commitment to their specific doctrines and ideology grants them depth of community and kind of thickness of culture?

They're not atomized in ways that you admire?

Yeah.

Again, slightly strangely, no. I'm not interested in looking backwards or sideways to religious eras.

I'm doing something slightly unusual, which is to say, to really advocate for creativity,

creativity in the areas in which religions used to operate.

I'm not interested in reviving religions or fostering new forms of religiosity,

but rather in exploring what religions were up to and thinking about what some of the gaps, you might say, are.

I mean, many of the museums of Europe, take the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam were explicitly modeled in the late 19th century on churches.

There was a very common belief that culture would replace scripture, that in the absence of divine beliefs,

what would pick up the slack, what would direct emotion, what would provide points of communion, et cetera, would be the arts.

And that's why, as I say, so many civic cultural buildings look like churches or temples,

places of worship, the very direct kind of reference.

And so one might say, well, isn't that fair enough?

And I draw attention really to the way in which that seems a slightly incomplete project.

So I'm speaking to you from London.

If you showed up at the Tate Gallery

and went to the Rothko room and knelt down in front of a Rothko

and burst into tears and were profoundly moved in a way

that we're not really used to in the age of museums

and according into the codes of how to behave in a museum, you'd be quickly ushered out by the guards.

You're supposed to imbibe art in ways that are, you know, one might say chilly, even cold.

It's a private experience.

100

It's non -ecstatic.

101

It is not done with others.

102

And there's a sort of limit to what we're allowed to expect from a work of art.

103

It's both meant to be extremely important and nothing to cry about or indeed dance about.

104

And that strikes me.

105

And I'm intrigued because all societies, I mean, take the ancient Greeks who had some fascinating rituals.

106

So once a year, there was the festival of Dionysus.

107

Dionysus, the god of wine, the god of night, the god of folly.

108

And, you know, he's got his ritual moments.

109

And the whole citizenry, especially women, exit the city during the festival of Dionysus, dance in ecstatic ways to the beating of drums.

110

And, you know, of course, our friend Nietzsche here is very interested in this.

111

What's going on here?

112

What are the ancient Greeks knowing?

113

What do they know about us that we seem to have forgotten?

114

And, you know, I'm not the first person to point out that there has been a huge increase,

115

at least in recorded incidents of what we call mental illness, mental unwellness.

116

And one of the ways of thinking about that epidemic of mental unwellness is that the extreme emotions,

117

the untenable emotions that manifest themselves now privately have been, in different points in history,

118

marshaled around common rituals, which one might say handled them pretty cleverly, quite intelligently.

119

For the ancient Greeks, the concept of going a little mad once a year, or perhaps more often, was taken very seriously.

120

and was not seen, was seen as different from actually being mad.

121

Going mad is something that you do because, you know, there's divine madness in each of us.

122

Being mad is a more permanent state, often to do with denying the fact that there is divine madness in us.

123

And so you know, the Greeks rather cleverly had these two characters, Apollo and Dionysus, at the center of their culture.

124

Apollo interested in reason, in calm, in order, balance, symmetry, and Dionysus very interested in other things.

125

Again, I'm less interested in the specifics of these gods.

126

We might find other gods.

127

We might find other festivals.

128

We might look at things differently.

129

But there's a methodology there.

130

There's a way of structuring experience, which modern society doesn't have.

131

And I'm very interested in drawing attention to that.

132

Well, that's very interesting.

133

I think I want to just explore all of that terrain again

134

a little more systematically just because I'm interested to discover if there's anything we disagree about.

135

I think you and I have been thought to have disagreed.

136

I think your book Religion for Atheists came out.

137

When was that?

138

2012. Oh, yeah.

139

2012. So yeah, about the same time as you were very prominent on what looked like another side.

140

I was the four -headed atheist along with Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins and Daniel Tennant.

141

I think people thought you and I fundamentally disagreed about a few things there.

142

And I'm hearing echoes of that suspicion in what you just said, but I'm not sure I disagree with any of what you said, but I just want to try to figure this out.

143

So I think I can completely sign up to the set of claims that I thought I heard,

144

which is that one, secular culture is uncomfortable with ecstasy, right?

145

We don't have a frame in which to think about it and integrate it and normalize it and even prioritize it.

146

And ecstasy might even be the wrong noun.

147

It's more that there's a positive end to the continuum of human well -being that has not been well explored,

148

especially in Western culture and especially of late.

149

I very much like your use of the word ecstasy.

150

I think it's bang on.

151

And, you know, let's go straight to the nightclub at this point.

152

You know, the word ecstasy has been linked to, obviously, traditionally a drug that you take in a nightclub.

153

And even if you think of the nightclub, the nightclub, there are nightclubs all over the world.

154

They don't have very high cultural prestige.

155

They don't have, there's no psychological meaning appended to them.

156

There's no transcendental function.

157

They are in the world of fun, of recreation, which I think is a real pity.

158

And I think one of the things

159

that the modern world does is it misses out on drawing from things like the nightclub,

160

the themes that previous ages would have mined in them.

161

So, you know, if I was the absolute ruler of...

162

Just to add a few pieces to this puzzle for you to work with, I think what you're arguing for is

163

that secular culture needs a conception of profundity and the sacred that traditionally only religion was able to give us.

164

Totally, totally.

165

That's absolutely right.

166

And even, you know, take the concept of the planetarium.

167

So all around the world, planetariums, you go and look at stars.

168

How do we justify planetariums?

169

It's overwhelmingly to do with scientific explanation rather than or, or A -W -E.

170

In other words, you know, you go to planetarium and they're very keen to tell you about the precise dimensions of, you know, Kepler 32b and, you know, the rings of Saturn,

171

etc. Rather than what I think would be an equally apposite point, which is how small we are in the universe,

172

you know, ego reduction, which has traditionally been one of the functions that religion has taken on very effectively.

173

You know, in Zen Buddhism, there were moon viewing ceremonies on platforms, poetry was read, rice cakes were eaten,

174

or still are in some parts of japan at some points

175

um in other words the moon is being used not as an astronomical phenomenon

176

but as a um sort of psychosocial phenomenon as a as a as a tool of culture

177

and that's very helpful so

178

if you look at you know the nightclub uh the planetarium etc there are lots of things

179

that secular culture has but isn't properly um connecting up with some of the themes

180

that religions were pretty good at bringing to the fore.

181

Well, now there's, as you I'm sure are aware of this,

182

there's this resurgent interest in psychedelics and both on the research end and on the so -called recreational end.

183

Um, and granted there, there are two very different moods with which one can approach this project.

184

It can be the nightclub mood of just having fun or the, um,

185

the more contemplative mood of actually trying to understand something deep

186

and durable and profound about the nature of your mind

187

and your capacity for overcoming the unnecessary suffering of which you referenced at the beginning here.

188

Yes.

189

I mean, I think psychedelics are very interesting.

190

I've explored this theme.

191

I mean, if we look at, you know, you mentioned these two functions.

192

Absolutely.

193

I mean, one of the functions of psychedelics,

194

MDMA, etc., is socially to remind us of what we have in common with other people.

195

You know, when people say, I took this substance and I loved everybody.

196

This is, of course, one of the feats of kind of spiritual development in all religions,

197

that it is through kind of meditative activities and and also ecstatic activities, that you discover that the barriers between humans are,

198

let's put it gently, exaggerated in normal life.

199

In normal life, we focus on the differences, but how interesting and how nice life would be if we focused on the similarities.

200

And we may need a substance and a setting in which that can more easily be accessible to us.

201

And then, you know, you mentioned self -exploration.

202

Well, exactly.

203

I mean, the Freudians, bless them, and I'm very indebted to the Freudian tradition, they understand that one of the main obstacles to thinking about yourself is fear,

204

that there are resistance based on a fear of all sorts of deeply uncomfortable things about oneself, like, you know, one's sexuality may be more complicated,

205

one may have aggressive urges where one's supposed to be merely,

206

inverted commas, nice, etc. And that a substance like MDMA might lower the defenses,

207

enabling one to achieve insight.

208

And again, you know, what a serious mission for something which for too long languished in the lane called fun.

209

So, you know, yeah.

210

Have psychedelics been part of your process?

211

I mean, have you taken the various drugs?

212

I don't know if I'm going to be arrested for saying so.

213

I don't know.

214

But yes, I have taken MDMA and psilocybin in sort of clinical or pseudo -clinical settings.

215

In other words, for these ends of self -exploration more than so -called fun.

216

And they've been tremendously helpful in essentially,

217

you know, my problem with drugs and alcohol was always that these things were not being used seriously.

218

It's not the substance itself that I've ever had any problem with.

219

And again, religions have been wonderful at reminding us.

220

I mean, you know, what is Dionysus responsible for?

221

He's responsible for the god of wine.

222

He's a god of wine.

223

And how interesting to put wine right at the center of, you know, ritual and psychological development.

224

And we too often fail to do that.

225

Yeah, well, the Greeks, as you know, had the Ellicinian mysteries for a couple of millennia.

226

And, you know, those who partook came away saying that this was the foundational few days of their lives.

227

And to some degree, it's at least if we don't blow it and recapitulate some of the errors of the 1960s here,

228

what the current moment promises is a more sober, more methodical, more scientifically informed,

229

but yet nonetheless profound kind of reintegration of that kind of ritual, you know, the pharmacological ritual in culture.

230

You know, I'm thinking about why people are boring.

231

All human beings have very complex lives, but we all know some people who, when you come into their vicinity,

232

you yourself feel that you have an awful lot to say to them and around them.

233

And there's a lot of feeling.

234

And other people, we feel, you know, they are saying, what have you been up to lately?

235

And the mind goes completely blank, largely because I tend to think that this is a function of how much they've explored of themselves.

236

A so -called interesting person is generally somebody who's been very interested in themselves, not in a narrowly egocentric way, but they've opened a lot of doors.

237

And I think one unconsciously senses that when you come into contact with them and then you have a lot to say.

238

I would immediately put you in that category, Sam, which is why people enjoy talking to you.

239

And I think that one of the things

240

that psychedelics allow people to do is more easily explore bits of their minds

241

which when they are outside of the substance continues

242

and gives them a kind of space

243

which they allow to other people to you know explore their own minds

244

and so one ends up you know having a more interesting time

245

and a more

246

if you use a hackneyed word compassionate time where there's a lot more on the table to discuss

247

and to to feel Well, let's talk about the attenuation of the ego, because it strikes me that there's a normative,

248

optimal, entirely desirable version of this, and it's one that I've thought a lot about and spoken a lot about.

249

But there's also a kind of pathological counterfeits,

250

I would say, and they relate to the discomfort we referenced a moment ago around ecstasy

251

and secular culture and its political implications.

252

I mean, when you're talking about, you know, the Dionysian attitude and what that looks like at the level of a crowd,

253

I mean, it looks one way in a rave or, you know, other nightclub setting.

254

It looks another way in a political context, you know, that, you know, one could argue that at,

255

you know, a large political rally, you know, Nuremberg looking or otherwise,

256

there is a kind of self -overcoming of the individual.

257

There's this fusion to some larger end

258

that amounts to people kind of losing themselves in shoulder -to -shoulder contact with their brothers and sisters.

259

And the pathology of all of that is all too obvious when you just read any bit of history.

260

How should we think about the success and failure of what lies beyond the ego?

261

Such a fascinating question.

262

I mean, I'd begin with the story of every human in a family uh you emerge into the world with a mother

263

and a father and you know it's hard to remember

264

but essential to remember how mighty every mother and father

265

or every caregiver looks to an infant um you know this

266

large person can throw a ball across the garden can master

267

language can write uh can sing can pick you up

268

and um spin you around the room uh and And from that experience, all of us have rooted in us,

269

I think, a capacity to be awed by another human and, as it were, to imagine,

270

to project onto them an all -knowing quality.

271

And in normal development, in normal psychological development,

272

we gradually discover in adolescence that our parents are flawed, that even though they looked absolutely powerful when we were seven,

273

by the time we're 17, we discover that they're boring, frightened, uncertain, and in many ways, not sure of where they're going.

274

And these are wonderful discoveries, necessary discoveries of adolescence.

275

And if I can make a strange link of democracy,

276

democracy is the democratic mindset is one which is post -adolescent and properly recognizes the impossibility of heroes.

277

There are no heroes.

278

There are merely humans like you and me who are finding their way, prone to error, and not omnipotent.

279

But in moments of stress, in moments of regression, people and peoples will, as you know, of course,

280

regress back to that childhood mentality and then you get serious dangers

281

because if somebody's the daddy or the mummy and they don't have the benevolence that we sometimes associate with those words, then you've got trouble on your hands.

282

And I think it's in all of us.

283

All of us can be in danger, depending on our state of mind and the atmosphere around,

284

of projecting onto leaders a power that no adult can possess,

285

simply because that's where we all came from and it's a lot easier when you're feeling under pressure to believe that.

286

Death is a very important thing to keep on the agenda

287

not just for the actual moment you're going to die but for everything it symbolizes about your limits of understanding and control.

288

Accepting death in its metaphorical sense of limits is a wonderful

289

route to making you you know a little bit less of a difficult person a little bit less of an awkward person.

290

People become a lot more fun when they accept their limitations.

✨ Video gợi ý

104 câu

Từ vựng và ghi chú luyện nói cho bài học này

Video này có 290 câu và 3682 từ để luyện shadowing. Phần lời nói dài 24:25. Người nói nói với tốc độ tự nhiên, khoảng 151 từ mỗi phút, gần với hội thoại hằng ngày. Chỉ 81% số từ nằm trong 3.000 từ tiếng Anh thông dụng nhất, nên từ vựng khá khó.

Từ vựng quan trọng trong video

15 từ đáng học trong video, kèm phiên âm và nghĩa:

Từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa
explore động từ	/ɪkˈsploɹ/	thám hiểm
nightclub danh từ	/ˈnʌɪtklʌb/	câu lạc bộ giải trí, câu lạc bộ đêm
ritual danh từ	/ˈɹɪt͡ʃ.u.əl/	lễ nghi, nghi lễ
secular tính từ	/ˈsɛkjʊlə/	thế tục
substance danh từ	/ˈsʌbstəns/	vật chất
discover động từ	/dɪˈskʌvə/	phát hiện, phát kiến
priority danh từ	/pɹaɪˈɒɹɪti/	sự ưu tiên
emotion danh từ	/ɪˈməʊ.ʃən/	cảm xúc
argue động từ	/ˈɑɹ.ɡju/	tranh luận
discovery danh từ	/dɪˈskʌv.ɹi/	khám phá
mood danh từ	/muːd/	tâm trạng, tính khí
helpful tính từ	/ˈhɛlp.fl̩/	hay giúp đỡ
illness danh từ	/ˈɪl.nəs/	bệnh, sự đau yếu
merely trạng từ	/ˈmɪəli/	chỉ, đơn thuần
remind động từ	/ɹəˈmaɪnd/	nhắc nhở, nhắc

Cụm động từ bạn sẽ nghe

Từ	Nghĩa
pick up động từ	nhặt, lượm

Ngữ pháp trong video

Những cấu trúc người nói dùng nhiều nhất, kèm đúng cụm từ trong video:

Cấu trúc	Trong video
“Used to” used to + động từ — thói quen hoặc tình trạng trong quá khứ nay không còn	used to operate · used to in
Thì hiện tại hoàn thành have/has + quá khứ phân từ — việc đã xảy ra nhưng còn liên quan đến hiện tại	has been · I've known · You've done
Câu bị động be + quá khứ phân từ — nhấn vào việc xảy ra, không phải người làm	are not really related · are filled · were devoted
Mệnh đề quan hệ who / which + mệnh đề — thêm thông tin về người hoặc vật	place, which is · unusual, which is · point, which is

Phát âm cần chú ý

Người nói dùng 66 dạng rút gọn, ví dụ I'm, don't, you're. Hãy nói theo dạng ngắn đúng như bạn nghe.

Âm “th”: nonetheless /ˌnʌnðəˈlɛs/, methodology /ˌmɛθ.əˈdɑ.lə.d͡ʒi/, thickness /ˈθɪknəs/
Âm “sh” và “zh”: unusual /ʌnˈjuːʒ(u)əl/, emotion /ɪˈməʊ.ʃən/, traditionally /tɹəˈdɪʃ.ə.nə.li/, exploration /ˌɛkspləˈɹeɪʃən/, explanation /ˌɛkspləˈneɪʃən/
Từ dài — đặt trọng âm cho đúng: psychological /ˌsaɪ.kəˈlɑː.d͡ʒɪ.kl̩/, unusual /ʌnˈjuːʒ(u)əl/, priority /pɹaɪˈɒɹɪti/, traditionally /tɹəˈdɪʃ.ə.nə.li/, exploration /ˌɛkspləˈɹeɪʃən/

Cách luyện với video này

Nghe hết video một lần, chưa cần nói, và ghi lại những từ bạn chưa biết.
Bắt đầu ở tốc độ 0,75×, nói đuổi từng câu, rồi quay lại tốc độ bình thường khi đã quen.
Ghi âm giọng mình rồi so với bản gốc, chú ý các từ như explore, nightclub, ritual.

Phương Pháp Shadowing Là Gì?

Shadowing là kỹ thuật học ngôn ngữ có cơ sở khoa học, ban đầu được phát triển cho chương trình đào tạo phiên dịch viên chuyên nghiệp và được phổ biến rộng rãi bởi nhà đa ngôn ngữ học Dr. Alexander Arguelles. Nguyên lý cốt lõi đơn giản nhưng cực kỳ hiệu quả: bạn nghe tiếng Anh của người bản xứ và lặp lại to ngay lập tức — như một "cái bóng" (shadow) đuổi theo người nói với độ trễ chỉ 1–2 giây. Khác với luyện ngữ pháp hay học từ vựng bị động, Shadowing buộc não bộ và cơ miệng phải đồng thời xử lý và tái tạo ngôn ngữ thực tế. Các nghiên cứu khoa học xác nhận phương pháp này cải thiện đáng kể phát âm, ngữ điệu, nhịp điệu, nối âm, kỹ năng nghe và độ lưu loát khi nói — đặc biệt hiệu quả cho người luyện IELTS Speaking và muốn giao tiếp tiếng Anh tự nhiên như người bản ngữ.

Phương pháp shadowing: đọc hướng dẫn từng bước đầy đủ →

Luyện nói tiếng Anh bằng Shadowing qua video: Why Is Everyone So Unhappy?

You're Too Self-Aware to Be Happy | The Psychology of Deep Thinkers

Book Club Debate: Is Technology Making Us Lonelier?

What is The School of Life?

Why Is Everybody So Angry Now?

Jordan Peterson - You Need a Routine!

World Leading Physician View On ADHD: Gabor Mate

Why I Chose a Life with Books

Sam Harris basically breaks down the secret to life (again)

On Suicide

Why You Feel So Busy All The Time | Real English Conversation

Why relationships in 2026 carry impossible expectations | Alain de Botton

How to be less neurotic | The Gray Area