|
Door closer, are you? “关门者”，你是吗？ 1 The next time you're deciding between rival options, one which is primary and the other which is secondary, ask yourself this question: What would Xiang Yu do? 下次你要在两个难于取舍的、主要的和次要的选择之间做决定时，不妨问自己这样一个问题：项羽会怎么做？ 2 Xiang Yu was a Chinese imperial general in the third century BC who took his troops across the Zhang River on a raid into enemy territory. To his troops' astonishment, he ordered their cooking pots crushed and their sailing ships burned. 项羽是公元前三世纪中国古代王朝的一位将军。他带领他的部队横渡漳河，突袭进入了敌方的领地。他下令砸锅烧船，令他的部队大为震惊。 3 He explained that he was imposing on them a necessity for attaining victory over their opponents. What he said was surely motivating, but it wasn't really appreciated by many of his loyal soldiers as they watched their vessels go up in flames. But the genius of General Xiang Yu's conviction would be validated both on the battlefield and in modern social science research. General Xiang Yu was a rare exception to the norm, a veteran leader who was highly respected for his many conquests and who achieved the summit of success. 他解释道，他强加给他们的是战胜对手的必要举措。他所说的无疑十分鼓舞士气，但当他那许多忠诚的士兵眼睁睁地看着他们的船只在火焰中被焚毁时，他们并不赞成他的做法。不过项羽将军的这种砸锅焚船的做法所显示出的天赋，在战场上和现代社会科学研究中都将得到肯定。项羽将军是一个罕见的不墨守成规的人，他是一位经验丰富的领袖，由于他征战无数并达到了成功的顶峰，他深受尊敬。 4 He is featured in Dan Ariely's enlightening new publication, Predictably Irrational, a fascinating investigation of seemingly irrational human behavior, such as the tendency for keeping multiple options open. Most people can't marshal the will for painful choices, not even students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where Dr. Ariely teaches behavioral economics. In an experiment that investigated decision-making, hundreds of students couldn't bear to let their options vanish, even though it was clear they would profit from doing so. 丹·阿雷利极富启迪性的新书《可预见的非理性》对项羽作了专题介绍。这本书对看似非理性的人类行为，譬如人类总想留住多项选择机会的倾向，进行了引人入胜的调查。大多数人都不能整理自己的思路来做痛苦的选择，麻省理工学院上阿雷利博士行为经济学这门课的学生也不例外。在调查作决策的一项实验中，几百名学生都不能忍受眼睁睁看着他们的选择机会消失，即使他们很清楚这样做对他们有利。 5 The experiment revolved around a game that eliminated the excuses we usually have for refusing to let go. In the real world, we can always say, "It's good to preserve our options." Want a good example? A teenager is exhausted from soccer, ballet, piano, and Chinese lessons, but her parents won't stop any one of them because they might come in handy some day! 实验是围绕着一个游戏展开的，这个游戏排除了我们通常不肯放手的借口。在现实世界里，我们总会说：“保留我们的选择机会是对的。”想要一个好的例子吗？一个十多岁的女孩被足球、芭蕾舞、钢琴、中文课给累得筋疲力尽，但她的父母不会让她停止任何一项活动，理由是它们有一天可能会派上用场！ 6 In the experiment sessions, students played a computer game that provided cash behind three doors appearing on the screen. The rule was the more money you earned, the better player you were, given a total of 100 clicks. Every time the students opened a door by clicking on it, they would use up one click but wouldn't get any money. However, each subsequent click on that door would earn a fluctuating sum of money, with one door always revealing more money than the others. The important part of the rule was each door switch, though having no cash value, would also use up one of the 100 clicks. Therefore, the winning strategy was to quickly check all the doors and keep clicking on the one with the seemingly highest rewards. 在这个实验里，学生要玩一个电脑游戏:在电脑屏幕上会显示三扇门，每扇门后都会提供一些现金。该游戏的规则是每个人都只能点击100次，你点击获取的钱越多，你就玩得越好。学生每点击一次打开一扇门，他们会用掉一个点击数，但却不会得到任何钱。然而，随后接着在那扇门上的每次点击都会挣得数额不等的钱，三扇门显示的钱总有一扇比另外两扇多。这个游戏规则的重点是虽然每次换门没有金钱回报，可还是会用掉一次点击数。所以，制胜战略是要迅速查看所有的门，然后只点击那扇似乎是钱最多的门。 7 While playing the game, students noticed a modified visual element: Any door left unclicked for a short while would shrink in size and vanish. Since they already understood the game, they should have ignored the vanishing doors. Nevertheless, they hurried to click on the lesser doors before they vanished, trying to keep them open. As a result, they wasted so many clicks rushing back to the vanishing doors that they lost money in the end. Why were the students so attached to the lesser doors? They would probably protest that they were clinging to the doors to keep future options open, but, according to Dr. Ariely, that isn't the true factor. 在玩游戏时，学生们注意到了一个视觉上的变化：如果有片刻没点击某扇门，那扇门就会慢慢缩小并消失。由于他们已了解了游戏规则，他们本应对要消失的门不予理睬。然而，在它们消失以前，他们却迫不及待地去点击那些变小的门，试图让它们开启着。结果是，他们在匆忙回去点击那些快消失的门时浪费了很多点击数以至于最后输了钱。为什么学生对那些变小的门如此依恋呢？他们可能会争辩说，他们紧抓住这些门是为将来多留一些机会。但是，据阿雷利博士说，这不是真正的原因。 8 Instead of the excuse to maintain future options open, underneath it all the students' desire was to avoid the immediate, though temporary, pain of watching options close. "Closing a door on an option is experienced as a loss, and people are willing to pay a big price to avoid the emotion of loss," Dr. Ariely says. In the experiment, the price was easily measured in lost cash. In life, the corresponding costs are often less obvious such as wasted time or missed opportunities. 在他们为将来多留一些机会的借口背后反映出的是所有的学生都不堪目睹眼前的选择机会被剥夺，尽管这种痛苦是临时的。阿雷利博士说：“每闭上一扇选择之门就如同经受了一次损失，人们宁愿付出很大的代价，也要避免情感的失落。”在实验中，损失很容易用丢失的现金来衡量。在生活中，相应的损失就往往没那么明显，如浪费时间，错过机会。 9 "Sometimes these doors are closing too slowly for us to see them vanishing," Dr. Ariely writes. "We may work more hours at our jobs without realizing that the childhood of our sons and daughters is slipping away." “有时候，这些门是慢慢关闭的，我们没有看到它们在悄然消失，”阿雷利博士写道：“我们可能花很多时间在工作上，却没有意识到我们子女的童年正在悄悄溜走。” 10 So, what can be done to restore balance in our lives? One answer, Dr. Ariely says, is to implement more prohibitions on overbooking. We can work to reduce options on our own, delegating tasks to others and even giving away ideas for others to pursue. He points to marriage as an example, "In marriage, we create a situation where we promise ourselves not to keep options open. We close doors and announce to others we've closed doors." 那么，我们可以做些什么让我们的生活恢复平衡呢？阿雷利博士说，一个办法是制止更多的超额预约。我们可以自己减少选择，将任务委派给其他人，甚至放弃一些点子，让其他人去做。他用婚姻作为例子：“在婚姻中，我们承诺不保留选择机会，我们就创造了获得最佳选择的有利局面。我们关上可选择的门，并告诉别人我们已作出选择。” 11 Since conducting the door experiment, Dr. Ariely says he has made a conscious effort to lessen his load. He urges the rest of us to resign from committees, prune holiday card lists, rethink hobbies and remember the lessons of door closers like Xiang Yu. 阿雷利博士说，自从进行了这个点击门的实验，他已经有意识地努力减轻自己的负担。他敦促我们辞去委员会的工作，删减送节日贺卡的名单，重新思考兴趣爱好，并记住像项羽那样的关门者给我们的启示。 12 In other words, Dr. Ariely is encouraging us to discard those things that seem to have outward merit in favor of those things that actually enrich our lives. We are naturally prejudiced to believe that more is better, but Dr. Ariely's research provides a dose of reality that strongly suggests otherwise. 换言之，他是鼓励我们放弃那些似乎只有表面价值的东西，而去追求那些能真正丰富我们生活的东西。我们很自然、很偏执地相信选择越多越好，但阿雷利博士的研究却强有力地告诉我们事实并非如此。 13 What price do we pay for trying to have more and more in life? What pleasure and satisfaction can be derived from focusing our energy and attention in a more concentrated fashion? Surely, we will have our respective answers. 我们想在生活中得到越来越多选择的代价是什么？我们能从更集中的精力和注意力中获得什么样的喜悦和满足？当然，我们每个人都会有自己的答案。 14 Consider these important questions: Will we have more by always increasing options or will we have more with fewer, carefully chosen options? What doors should we close in order to allow the right windows of opportunity and happiness to open? 试想一下这些重要的问题：怎么做会使我们获得更多，是不断增加选择，还是只保持少数精心挑选的选择？我们应关闭什么门，以便让机会和幸福之窗打开？ |
