Thursday, June 9, 2022

把问题简单化的“努力”

其实鸡汤文不仅对解决问题毫无帮助,而且会让受众进入一种奇怪的状态——他们每天看起来都充满正能量,非常努力,但往往缺乏分析问题和真正解决问题的能力。这些文章本质上类似于精神安慰剂,短时间内“效果出群”,过后则一切回归原样,偏偏喝汤的人还觉得自己已经状态良好。这种奇怪的状态我们姑且称为“鸡汤病”。
  
我们只要足够坚持和努力,就能够成功鸡汤文最大的罪行,就是锲而不舍地倡导这种看似正面,实则扭曲的价值观。任何一个接受过逻辑训练的人都明白:必要条件和充分条件在很多时候是不能等同的,具体到“成功”这件事,我们一般认为“坚持”和“努力”属于取得成功的必要但非充分条件。也就是说,成功往往需要坚持和努力,但坚持和努力不一定能给我们带来成功。
  
把坚持、努力和成功画上等号,本质上是试图将复杂的问题简单化。成功其实是一件非常复杂的事情,至今也没有哪种方法论敢宣称自己必然能够让人成功,这对一些尚未成功且丧失希望的人来说无疑是一件可怕的事情。鸡汤文的出现对这部分人来说是福音:他们往往渴望成功,又不愿意直面追求成功过程中必须面对的无比复杂的局面,但现在问题变得简单多了,他们只需要“努力坚持”就可以了。
  
任何一个人获得成功都不是简单的事情,这涉及能力、背景、运气、所处的环境等诸多因素。鸡汤文的做法则是把这些影响因子中“坚持和努力”的占比无限放大,几乎忽略其他因素。所以我们会看到鸡汤病患者的一个典型症状就是把失败归咎于自己不够努力,而不愿意去分析自己是否在其他方面出了问题。
  
鸡汤文的“我们只要足够坚持和努力,就能够成功”背后其实还有一层隐藏含义——我们做任何事情都是可以成功的。也就是说,失败是可以避免的,一个人失败只是因为“不够坚持和努力”。在这样的逻辑框架下,失败显然是不可接受的,因为它暗示了人在主观方面的“不努力”。但实际上在现实世界中,成功属于偶然现象,失败才是常态。
 
 一个人心智成熟的重要标志是:不缺乏追求成功的欲望和动力,并且能够以健康的心态去看待和接受失败。拒绝接受失败,其实就是拒绝接受真实的世界,拒绝接受自己。从这个角度来看,鸡汤病患者们其实都是心智不成熟的“小孩”。
 
 能够让人感觉自己可以解决任何问题,是因为鸡汤文把两个矛盾的理念融合在了一起,这样不管遇到什么情况,你总能找到一条能够说通的道理。当你失败了,想要坚持,鸡汤文会告诉你“坚持和努力必定成功”;当你失败了,不想坚持了,鸡汤文又会告诉你“放下才是获得幸福的根源”。几乎任何人面临的任何问题,都可以在鸡汤文里找到自己想要的答案。
 
鸡汤文并不会告诉我们应该怎么做,它只不过是作为一种载体,投射出我们内心深处最真实的想法。这种载体存在的意义在于为我们的行动提供了理论依据,从而让我们觉得心安理得。

阿何,《别再用勤奋掩饰你的懒惰》,2016.

Monday, June 6, 2022

再见,蟹笼效应!

据说篮子里的螃蟹会拉回其他想爬出来的螃蟹,但海洋动物专家还没有证实这一点,这只是一个比喻。

“蟹笼效应”向我们描述了一种现象,即不管是谁想离开他熟悉的环境,“篮子”里的同伴都会变得活跃,他们会有意识或无意识地不想让对方离开。这可能是出于嫉妒(“你不应该比我更好”),或是出于害怕失去另一个人,或是不想改变的习惯和意愿。

想要晋升的职场男女都会经历“蟹笼效应”,因为他们亲爱的同事会突然挽留他们,或者对这些升职的人评价很差,或者对其进行感情勒索。如果你想为了让自己变得更好而做出某些改变,你的朋友、亲戚或邻居就会出来阻碍你,让你内心不安或者产生质疑。而我们经常也会产生“蟹笼效应”,因为离开“篮子”时会感觉自己是“背叛者”。

你现在在哪个“蟹笼”里?是不是不想再待在里面了?你的同伴如何使你感到沮丧并阻止你向外攀爬?又是谁限制了你,让你认为自己必须待在“篮子”里?只有拥有这种意识才可能离开。

- Cordula Nussbaum,《谢谢,但今天不行》

Sunday, June 5, 2022

在批评与瑕疵中成长

批评别人必然是简单的,挑别人的错也必定是容易的,只是,批评本身应该是为了提供解决方案,让这个世界变得更好,如果为了批评或者为了凸显自己的思想去批评别人,真的好讨厌哦。

不以改变结果为目的的批判,就是无效的批判。
不提供解决方案的责备,就是无用的责备。

许多人的思维就是这样,在做一件事情之前,没有破釜沉舟的决心,又什么也不肯放弃,寻找着中间选项,然后小心翼翼地前行,这样的结果就是患得患失、没尽全力。

人不思改变,又不停地发牢骚,这种弱者思维必然会禁锢他,让他故步自封,难以前行,最终困在圈里飞不出去。

我们之所以要去书写不公平,去评论这个世界的丑恶现象,是因为我们想要改变。可是,一味地责骂抱怨,其实无济于事。纸上谈兵再出色也不如带兵出征学得多,前者只是理想中的状态,而后者却是脚踏实地地行动。

懂道理的人,永远认为自己是完美的,但凡人开始行动,总会有瑕疵,可是,人就是在这样的瑕疵中成长起来的。

- 李尚龙,《你只是看起来很努力》 

Wednesday, June 1, 2022

语言、品格与社会规则

语言在人类心灵发展中意义非凡。作为逻辑思维的基础,语言是人们产生概念、了解不同价值观的区别的必要工具。概念产生必将涉及全体人类社会,绝非个人私事,即人们的思想感情必须是普遍适用的,才能为人理解。例如在对美的认识、理解、感受等方面,人们已经有了一种共同的认知或已经确立了一项基本审美原则,所以才会在看见美的东西时心生快乐。由此可知,跟理智、智慧、逻辑、伦理、美学类似,思维与概念也以人类社会生活为源头,并在不希望人类文明分崩离析的社会成员之间,建立了紧密的关联。

法律、图腾与禁忌、信仰、教育等所有能保障人类生存的规则,都一定要被社会生活约束,跟社会生活规则相符。究其本质,人们一般谈到的公正、正直和人们眼中价值最高的人类性格,都属于人类社会需要的品性。社会生活的各种要求,相当于人类心灵的塑造者和所有心灵活动的指导者。责任感、忠诚、坦诚、喜爱真理之类的美德,只因都跟普遍适用于社会生活的原则相符,才得以产生并延续至今。

这说明必须要站在社会立场上,才能对一种性格的优劣做出判断,因为个人性格要被人留意到,一定要先证明其具备普遍意义,在这一点上,其跟一切科学、政治、艺术成就没有区别。这就相当于以个人的社会价值大小作为标准评价此人。我们往往会用理想化形象作为标准,为具体的个人做出评价。这种理想化形象要能借助对整个社会都有帮助的方法,解决个人的种种难题,还要能将个人社会感提升到某种高度。福特·缪勒以“根据社会规则掌控人生的人”来形容这种人。要让自己符合标准,必须要在自己跟其他人之间努力建立合作关系,且必须努力掌握人类社会成员应掌握的技巧。

- 阿德勒,《洞察人性》

比努力更重要的三件事

“努力”之外,还有太多重要因素被我们有意无意地忽略了。而在这些重要因素中,“方法论”“选择和判断”以及“积累性”是最主要的三个。
  
a)方法论——指的是我们必须透过现象看本质,花时间研究各种不同现象背后隐藏的共同规律,并据此提炼出一套解决问题的、具有一定普适性的方法体系。
 
 方法论的核心不是思考“这样才能把一件事情完成”,而是探索“为什么通过某种方式可以把一件事情完成”。学会这样的思维习惯,能够培养我们研究世间万物运作规律的能力,带来的好处是:当同样的事情的某些因素发生变化的时候知道该如何迅速应对,以及在面对全新的问题时能思考出解决办法。
  
工作和创业都不是考试,不要说标准答案,连标准问题都没有。我们每一天都要面临新情况,需要解决新问题,同样的问题在极短时间内又会发生新的变化。这种情况,不是你单纯通过努力就能解决的。
 
b)选择和判断——代表的是我们的预判能力,也就是在一定时间范围内,预测事态走向的一种能力。不管从事何种工作,或者只是求职,我们每天都要面临大量的“决策时期”,要做出选择。人生的所有选择汇总起来,将在很大程度上决定我们的成功概率和所能达到的高度。
 
 选择和判断能力,背后隐藏的是一个人掌握信息的广度,以及思考信息的深度。后者可以通过长时间的训练得到提高,而前者可以通过大量的阅读以及信息搜集得到改善。生活中,很多人的努力都只聚焦在一个点上,只专注于自己要做的事情,忽略了关联信息的搜集和深度思考。
  
c)积累性,是说在一件事情上不断积累,到达足够的时间长度。

阿何,《别再用勤奋掩饰你的懒惰》,2016.

Wednesday, May 25, 2022

Blindness That Kills

It is December 29, 1972, and Eastern Air Lines Flight 401 has just taken off from the bitter cold of New York City and is heading out to Miami. One hundred and sixty-three passengers are on board, most of them hoping to enjoy a New Year’s vacation in the sun.
 
The flight is smooth and without incident as, a little before midnight, the plane makes its final approach into Miami International Airport. The wheels are lowered in preparation for landing, the captain informs the guests of the local temperature, and the passengers fasten their seat belts.

But then the captain notices that something is wrong. On most aircraft, there are three sets of wheels: one set beneath each of the two wings, and another just below the nose. When the wheels are lowered into place and lock into position for landing, indicators in the cockpit light up. But the green light linked to the wheels beneath the nose has failed to illuminate.

This could mean one of two things: either the light itself is faulty or the wheels have failed to lock into place. Either way, the captain has no choice but to abort his landing to figure out what has gone wrong. He informs air traffic control at just after half past eleven.
 
What happens next will ultimately cause one of the biggest civil aviation disasters in history. The crew members fixate on the faulty light. They pull it from its fitting, they turn it around in their hands, they blow on it to remove dust, they get it jammed when trying to put it back in its fitting. They devote so much attention to the light, they fail to notice the gorilla in their midst.
 
The gorilla, in this case, is the fact that the autopilot has been inadvertently disengaged, and the airplane is losing altitude. As the crew continue to focus their attention on the light, the plane is now taking the crew and passengers on a downward path toward disaster in the Everglades.
 
As the plane drops through 1,750 feet, an altitude warning alarm rings through the cockpit. The alarm is part of a sophisticated warning system, informing the pilots of their mortal danger. But although the alarm is clearly audible on the black box recording, neither the pilot nor the copilot hears it. Their attention is so wrapped up with the light, they have no spare bandwidth with which to consciously register the noise. They are now less than one hundred seconds from death.
 
Altitude is declining every second. The pilots can’t feel it because their senses are deceived by the plane’s motion. They can’t see it through the windows because it’s a moonless night, and there is no visible horizon. But right in front of the pilot’s noses, the altitude meter is spinning downward. It is within their line of sight. It is possible that both pilot and copilot actually look at the meter and see it moving. But they can’t perceive what it is saying. Why? Because it never hits conscious awareness. 

Only when the plane is seven seconds from impact with the ground does the copilot finally realize that something is seriously wrong. The pilot takes evasive action, pulling hard on the lever, but it’s too late. A moment later the plane crashes, killing 101 people.
 
 
attentional resources vs. insufficient bandwidth 
 
Perhaps the most remarkable thing about Eastern Air Lines Flight 401 is that the plane’s detailed warning systems worked. The altitude meter told the pilots that the plane was descending, and the alarm system provided the same information in acoustic form. But neither made the slightest bit of difference. The pilots had insufficient bandwidth. They were inattentionally blind. For the pilots, focused on the faulty light, it was as if the warnings never happened. They vanished into the realms of the unconscious.
 
Crash investigators would later establish that the nose wheels had, in fact, locked into place: the plane could have landed. The only piece of faulty equipment was the lightbulb in the nose gear assembly fixture, which had burned out. One journalist said, “The crash occurred due to the failure of a $12 piece of kit.” In a way, he was right, but the deeper truth is that a warning system, however sophisticated, is often only as good as the attentional resources at the disposal of the crew.
 
Eastern Air Lines Flight 401 has become a seminal event in aviation safety history, changing the way crashes are investigated and the way pilots are trained. A key innovation in crew training systems is a clear procedure of delegation between the pilot and the copilots in order to free up attentional resources.
 
The problem with the faulty lightbulb was not just that the captain fixated on it, but that the rest of the crew did, too: the pool of attention was exclusively focused on a single problem. Had just one of the crew focused on the light fitting, there would have been plenty of available attention for the others to have picked up on the visual and acoustic cues indicating the plane’s descent. 

- Matthew Syed, Bounce: Mozart, Federer, Picasso, Beckham, and the Science of Success, Chapter 8

Sunday, May 15, 2022

Rest Ethic and Noble Leisure

Even if we could work at full capacity, day in and day out, we shouldn’t. A lot of the wonderful parts of the human experience center on rest, reflection, and recovery. Our minds and bodies need a reprieve from the constant pressure and demands on our time and brainpower. If we want to accomplish the big things we’ve set out to do – to create, lead, contribute, and make an impact – we need a rest ethic as strong as our work ethic.
 
A great rest ethic is not just about working less. It’s about becoming conscious of how you spend your time, recognizing that busyness is often the opposite of productivity, admitting and respecting your need for downtime and detachment, establishing clear boundaries and saying “no” more often, giving your ideas time and space to incubate, evaluating what success means to you, and ultimately finding and unlocking your deepest creative and human potential.
 
As Nassim Taleb noted, “only in recent history has ‘working hard’ signaled pride rather than shame.” With this false pride, our culture has descended into a crisis of mental health issues, burnout, and widespread unhappiness. Even the one thing we so desperately seem to be seeking – productivity – is suffering as a result.
 

Work is a necessity. But leisure was noble.
 
The key distinction Aristotle saw between mere work and noble leisure was essentially the question of why we do it. Work is done for a purpose, a utilitarian goal. Leisure, on the other hand, is done purely for its own sake, in search of meaning rather than purpose.
 
So while today we might think of Aristotle’s pursuits as “work,” to him they were largely leisure. Most of his thoughts were pure contemplation, which he considered as an “activity that is appreciated for its own sake…. Nothing is gained from it except the act of contemplation.” He was “pursuing science in order to know, and not for any utilitarian end.” Something “useless” can be “beyond usefulness” and a true good in itself. Unfortunately, even among the most “pure” knowledge workers today, such as academics, this form of thinking removed from purpose rarely exists anymore. We no longer understand the concept of noble leisure.
 
John Fitch & Max Frenzel, Time Off: A Practical Guide to Building Your Rest Ethic 
and Finding Success Without the Stress.