#348：安妮·杜克

100个电视频道，数千部点播电影，完全免费。

100 TV channels, thousands of movies on demand, completely free.

他们不要求提供信用卡。

They don't ask for a credit card.

甚至不需要注册。

They don't even you don't have to sign up.

你只需下载应用，然后就能直接观看了。

They just you just download the app and boom, you're in.

这是一种简单且完全合法的方式，可以免费观看你最爱的电视节目和热门电影。

It's easy, completely legal way to watch your favorite television shows and hit movies for free.

你还在等什么？

Why would you wait?

通过下载Pluto TV，永远不要再为电视付费。

Never pay for TV again by downloading Pluto TV.

你可以免费下载Pluto TV，适用于你所有喜爱的设备，包括手机、Roku、亚马逊Fire TV、Apple TV、智能电视、PlayStation，以及任何其他流媒体平台。

You can download Pluto you can download Pluto TV for free and all your favorite devices today, including your phone, Roku, Amazon Fire TV, Apple TV, smart TVs, PlayStations, anywhere else you stream.

Pluto TV 是领先的免费流媒体电视服务。

Pluto TV is the leading free streaming television service.

免费观看上百个频道和数千部电影。

Watch over a 100 channels, thousands of movies for free.

现在就行动吧。

Do it now.

你还等什么呢？

What are waiting for?

在概率评估中，我们的大脑是否忽略了什么？比如那2%的拦截概率，是否存在一些奇怪的现象，我姑且这么称呼，就是概率为2%却仿佛是确定的之类的情况？

Is there anything about probabilities that our brain is missing in that assessment, you with the 2%, you know, probability of a interception, is there is there are there any other you know, sometimes in probability, they're weird phenomenon, I guess I would call it, know, where it's 2% except in certainty or or something.

如果他们投掷一百次，而这一百次都没有出现拦截，你也可以把它解释为任何情况。

They would just, you know, if if throw it a 100 times though, and they they've thrown a 100 without the you know, without getting interception, you could interpret it as whatever.

我们是否遗漏了类似这样的东西？

Are are there anything like that that we're missing?

在这个特定的分析中没有。

Not in this particular analysis.

我认为，一般来说，问题在于我们并不擅长进行汇总。

I I think generally the problem is that we're not really good at aggregating.

对。

Right.

所以，这甚至

So And and is it even

真的理解2%意味着什么。

really understand what 2%

它意味着什么。

is it is means.

既然每种情况都如此不同，那么进行汇总真的合适吗？

It even appropriate to aggregate because each of these situations are so different?

嗯，我的意思是，你最坏的估计就是2%。

Well, yeah, I mean, that's what I'm saying that the that you your your worst estimate is 2%.

这是在跨十五年进行汇总后的结果。

That's if you aggregate across fifteen years.

但说实话，答案是聚合是合适的，但你得在后面加个注释。

But, yeah, I mean, the answer is it's appropriate to aggregate, but you have to aggregate with kind of an asterisk by it.

对。

Right.

对。

Right.

因为你明白，在聚合时，你知道你把一些有差异的情况合并在一起了。

Because you understand that those just, you know, in aggregating, you know that you're pulling together some situations that have differences.

是的。

Yes.

但你试图把最相似的东西整合起来，以获得一个估算值。

But you're trying to get the most kind of like things together to get an estimate.

因为我想强调的是，得到一个不完美的估算，总比没有估算好。

Because, you know, the thing that I always try to get across is that it's better to get a bad estimate than no estimate at all.

我的意思是，我可以告诉你，那里的拦截率将会略高于2%。

I mean, in the sense that I can tell you that the interception rate there is going to be somewhere between just above 02%.

所以我无法告诉你它确切的位置，但我至少把它限定在一个范围内，我宁愿有一个范围，也不愿什么都没有。

So I can't tell you exactly where it is in there, but I've got it at least in a range, and I'd rather have a range than nothing at all.

然后我认为下一步该讨论的是，你知道，我们告诉人们我们不告知他们结果，而是告诉他们我们的决策，或者你告诉他们一个与实际结果不同的结果，或者两个结果都告诉，我想这正是你的观点。

And and then I think the next place to go is, you know, where we talk about we tell people we don't tell people the outcomes, but tell them our decisions, or or or you tell them the wrong you know, different outcome than we actually had, or both outcomes, I guess, was your argument.

是的。

Yeah.

所以我认为对我们来说一个非常大的问题是，我们对概率的理解非常不足，而且我们知道，一旦知道了结果，就很难再清晰地评估决策的质量。

So I think one of so here's the really kind of big problem for us, is that we don't understand probabilities very much, and we know that once we know the outcome, our ability to actually think clearly about, the decision quality, it just becomes really hard.

这会给事情蒙上一层巨大的认知阴影。

It casts this really big cognitive shadow over things.

举个例子，在2016年大选期间，如果你看五三八网站上内特·西尔弗的预测，在最后一周特朗普和希拉里的胜率对比中，内特·西尔弗预测特朗普有35%的胜率。

So, like, an example would be in the twenty sixteen election, if you looked at what was on FiveThirtyEight with Nate Silver, as you were kind of leading into that last week, between Trump and Clinton, Nate Silver had Trump about 35% to win.

35%已经是一个很高的概率了。

So 35% is a lot.

但一旦特朗普真的赢了，人们就会觉得这似乎是唯一可能发生的结果。

But once you actually get the outcome of Trump winning, it feels like that was the only thing that could have happened.

所以人们回头一看，说纳特·西尔弗搞错了。

And so people looked back and said, well, Nate Silver was wrong.

哦，天哪。

Oh, wow.

尽管他根本没说希拉里一定会赢。

Even though, like, he he didn't say Clinton was gonna win.

他说希拉里有65%的概率会赢。

He said Clinton was gonna win 65% of the time.

所以

So

但这种表述概率的方式，人们的头脑已经本能地

Well, that that that we But that that way of framing probability, people, their brains already go

对。

Right.

没错。

Exactly.

所以他们只是拿结果出来，然后试图从结果中制造出确定性。

So then they just take they take the outcome and then they just try to create certainty out of that.

是的。

Yeah.

因此，一旦我们意识到这个问题——当我们知道结果后，就失去了将未来视为多种可能性的能力。

So once we kind of understand that there's this problem that if we know the outcome, we lose our ability to think about the future as a lot of different possibilities.

所以在事情发生前，当你说到‘要么希拉里赢，要么特朗普赢，希拉里赢的概率是多少，特朗普赢的概率是多少’，人们在事前完全能接受这种说法。

So beforehand, when you're saying, well, either Clinton could win or Trump could win, and it's gonna be some percentage of time that Clinton will win and some percentage of time that Trump will win, people are totally fine with that before the fact.

是的。

Yeah.

他们明白。

They get it.

他们会说，好吧，这棵树有两个分支。

They're like, okay, there's two branches of this tree.

是的。

Yeah.

他们完全能接受。

They're totally fine.

但一旦有了结果，这种能力就消失了，你只会觉得发生的事情是必然的。

But once you have the outcome, that ability goes away, and you it just it just seems so inevitable what's happened.

你知道我们为什么会进化出这种倾向吗？

Any idea why we've evolved with that?

因为相比false negative，false positive的错误对我们更有利。

Well, because we're much better off making an error that's a false positive

嗯。

Mhmm.

而不是false negative。

Than a false negative

嗯。

Mhmm.

从进化角度来说。

Evolutionarily speaking.

所以我们想要做的，就是在作为物种进化的过程中，活到明天再继续战斗。

So what we wanna do is just live to fight another day as we're evolving as a species.

所以如果你想象一下，我身处一片大草原，听到树叶沙沙作响，与其错误地认为那不是狮子而留下来，不如错误地认为那是狮子然后逃跑，这样对我更有利。

So if you think about, I'm on a savannah and I hear rustling in the leaves, it's better for me to falsely think that's a lion and run away than to falsely think it's not a lion and stay.

所以我们是在高估风险。

So we're overestimating risk.

我们就是在这么做吗？

Is that what we're doing?

实际上，我们更倾向于把信号当作信号，而不是当作噪音，对吧？

Well, what we're doing is we're connecting we're we're more likely to take signal we're more likely to think something is a signal than something is noise, right?

所以我们知道，在大草原上，草丛沙沙作响通常是噪音。

So we know that when there's rustling in the grasses on the savannah that that's noisy.

有时候那是狮子，有时候只是风。

Sometimes it's going to be a lion and sometimes it's just going to be the wind.

所以当你试图从这些声音中分辨出信号时，我们天生就有一种偏向。

So as you're trying to figure out, as you're trying to pull signal out of that, we just have a bias.

从进化角度来看，进化倾向于选择那些倾向于将事物视为信号的人。

We're we're from an evolutionary standpoint, evolution selective for people have a bias to think that's a signal.

这很有道理。

Which makes sense.

是的。

Yeah.

此外，还有许多关于模式识别的内容，我们进化出了一种过度识别模式的倾向。

And then there's all sorts of stuff about recognizing patterns that we sort of evolved to kind of over recognize patterns.

所以，当你试图让一个物种生存下来时，过度确定性会带来很多优势，对吧？

So, there's just a lot of advantages when you're trying to have a species survive to sort of too much certainty, right?

比如假阳性、过度自信、在不存在的地方看到模式。

Like false positives, overconfidence, seeing patterns where they don't exist.

这就是为什么人们很容易相信阴谋论的原因之一。

This is part of the reason why people really fall for conspiracy theories, for example.

所以我们知道存在这个问题，并且一旦出现结果，我们的决策质量就会变得非常差。

So we know that we have this problem and we know that once we have outcomes that we're really, really bad at decision quality.

所以，为了摆脱结果的影响，你能做的最好的事情之一，就是像我刚才和你讨论皮特·卡罗尔那件事那样做。

So one of the best things you can do in order to kind of get out from the shadow of an outcome is kind of do what I just did with you with the Pete Carroll thing.

是的。

Yeah.

所以我可以找三组人，对吧？

So I could go to three groups of people, right?

然后对其中一组人说，嗯，那是超级碗比赛，有一个非常重要的决定，他选择传球战术并且球被接住了。

And that one group of people, I could say, well, it was the Super Bowl, there was this really big decision, he called for a pass play and the pass was caught.

你怎么看这件事？

What do you think about it?

然后我大概能从他们那里得到一个答案。

And I kind of get an answer from them.

接着我可以去找另一群人，描述同样的情况并说，所以球被拦截了。

And then I could go to another group of people, describe the same situation and say, so the ball was intercepted.

你觉得那怎么样？

What do you think about that?

我可以从他们那里得到反馈。

I could get the answer from them.

然后，拥有第三组人非常好，我会向他们描述完全相同的情境，并问：你觉得怎么样？

And then it's really good to have a third group of people where I describe the exact same situation, and I say, What do you think about it?

但我不会告诉他们结果。

And I don't tell them the outcome.

那么他们的评估能力如何呢？

How is their assessing abilities then?

好吗？

Is it good?

实际上，这比直接告诉他们发生了什么的那两组人要好得多。

It's actually much better than the groups where you actually tell them what happened.

是的。

Yeah.

我喜欢采用告诉他们结果的那几组人，是因为听到负面结果的人往往会挑出决策过程中更消极的方面，而这些意见很有价值。

The reason why I like to take the groups where you tell them what happened is that the people who hear it as a negative outcome will tend to pull out some of the more negative things about the decision making, and that's useful to hear.

而听到正面结果的人会挑出所有积极的方面，这样你就可以对比这两组观点，他们会看到另一组人看不到的一些东西。

And the people who hear the positive are going to be pulling out all the positive stuff, so now you can kind of look at those two things and, you know, they're going to see some things that the other group won't.

你能给我举个

Can you give me the The

正面观点的人会看到负面观点的人看不到的一些东西。

positive people will see some things that the negative people won't.

而那些不知道结果的人会提供某些信息，你可以从中综合分析，看出决策的各个组成部分。

And then the people who don't know the outcome, will give you certain information, and you kind of start to look across it so that you can see sort of what the pieces of the decision are.

你能给我们举个例子吗？比如在生活中，这种工具在哪些决策场景中会很有用？

Can can you can you give us an example of the kind of decision making, say, in life that this would be a good useful tool for?

在游戏情境中，这听起来是有道理的。

In a game setting, so to speak, it it sort of makes sense.

很多生活场景都涉及博弈论，但你认为最应该在哪些地方应用这种方法呢？

And a lot of life is game theory, but where would you where would you most apply this, do you think?

嗯，我的回答可能有点敷衍，但其实无处不在。

Well, so I mean, it's a silly answer, but kind of everywhere.

我想像是职业选择之类的，是的。

Well, I would think like career choices or Yeah.

投资，投资，对，类似这样的事情。

Investments, investments, right, things like that.

对。

Right.

当然包括投资，尤其是当我们投资时，查看投资组合，每天都能看到结果，对吧？

Definitely investments, particularly because as we look at our like, when we're investing and you look at your portfolio, you're getting results every single day, right?

股票每天都在上下波动。

Like the stock is ticking up or down every single day.

当你试图分析自己职业生涯中的决策时，比如你是销售员，成交了一笔单子，但你并不知道。

As you're trying to analyze your own decisions in your own career, like you're a salesperson, you close a sale, you don't.

你在琢磨，我的策略好吗？

You're trying to figure out was my strategy good?

哪些是运气造成的？

What was due to luck?

我本可以以更高的价格成交那笔销售吗？

Would I have been able to close that sale higher for more for a higher amount than I actually did?

我是不是做得特别好，才达成了这个成交价，而大多数人其实会成交得更低？

Did I do an extra good job to close it for what I did and actually most people would have closed it lower?

很难说。

It's hard to say.

尤其是在你实际成交之后，更难判断了，对吧？

And it's hard to say particularly after you've actually closed the sale, right?

所以在大多数职业决策中，当你进行任何战略规划，试图评估自己的成果，或者判断自己是否在养育孩子方面做得好时，不要在谈论你的决策时告诉别人结果如何。

So, in most career decisions, when you're doing any kind of strategic planning, when you're trying to assess the results that you have, when you're trying to figure out if you're doing a good job raising your children, don't tell them don't tell people how it's turning out as you're talking about your decisions.

这里有一个非常简单的例子。

Here's a really simple one.

当我试图讨论我读过的内容时，比如一篇政治评论文章，或者我读过的科学期刊文章，无论是什么，当我跟你谈论我读过的文章时，我会尽量小心，不向你表达我的个人观点。

So, when I'm trying to discuss something that I've read, let's say it's a political opinion piece or something I've read in a scientific journal or, whatever it might be, When I'm talking to you, like if I were talking to you about an article that I read, I would try to be really careful not to offer you my opinion.

对。

Right.

因为如果我这么做了，我实际上就是在告诉你结果是什么。

Because if I do that, I'm essentially telling you what the outcome is.

我是在告诉你我的结论。

I'm telling you what my own conclusion is.

对。

Right.

这样一来，我还不如根本没问你这个问题。

And now, I might as well not have asked you the question in the first place.

这其实很有趣，因为真的很难做到。

And it's really interesting because it's really hard.

所以我认为，如果你仔细想想，当你说到‘我读了一篇特别有趣的评论文章，刊登在《华盛顿邮报》上’时

So I think, like, if you think about it, when you're saying, oh, I read this really interesting opinion piece in the Already Washington Post

你已经带有偏见了。

you're biasing.

对。

Right.

是的

Yeah.

这里说的是什么内容。

Here here's what here's what it said.

我觉得这篇文章非常好。

I thought it was really good.

是的

Yeah.

我真希望你能读一读，然后告诉我你的想法。

I'd love for you to read it and tell me what you think.

你认为，你给我的意见会发生什么变化？

What's gonna happen, do you think, to the opinion that you're gonna give me back?

是的

Yeah.

所以，如果我换种方式，直接发给你这篇文章，然后说：‘我很想听听你对这篇文章的看法。’

So if instead I say, I just send you the article and I say, hey, would love to get your thoughts on this.

我就这么说，我不会告诉你我对它的任何看法，这样我反而能从你那里得到更好的意见。

And that's all I say and I don't tell you anything about what I think about it, now I'm gonna get a much better opinion from you.

但人们从不这么做。

But people don't do that.

比如，上一次有人跟你分享他们读过的东西，却在问你看法之前没先说自己的观点，那是什么时候？

Like, when was the last time somebody told you about something they read where they didn't tell you their opinion on it before they asked for yours?

天啊。

Jesus.

现在，人们提起这些事，只是为了告诉你他们的看法。

These days, they bring it up only to tell you their opinion.

没错。

Exactly.

但是

But

最近人们经常谈论运气，运气，运气。

what there's a lot of talk these days about luck, luck, luck.

人们之所以成功，你知道，是因为运气。

People are, you know, successful successful because because of of luck.

运气。

Luck.

但运气在多大程度上确实是成功故事的一部分呢？

But But to what extent is luck actually a piece of the story?

我的意思是，确实有一些运气成分。

I mean, it's certainly some.

我们该如何评估运气呢？

How how do we assess luck?

是的。

Yeah.

所以我认为，当人们谈论运气时，他们想表达的一部分意思是，首先，这个系统中确实存在很多运气。

So I think that, you know, part of what people are trying to get at when they talk about luck is that, first of all, there is a lot of luck in the system.

而且你可以从多种不同的角度来理解运气，因为当某人成功时，如果说他们运气很好，并不意味着否定了他们充分利用了自己所拥有的运气。

And you can think about luck in a variety of different ways, because when someone's successful, if you say that they had a lot of luck involved, that's not to take away the fact that they did a lot with the luck that they had.

对的。

Right.

所以我认为，这就是为什么人们不太愿意接受这种观点——说你的生活之所以如此发展，很大程度上是运气使然。

So and I think that this is why people are kind of averse to this idea of people saying, Hey, you know, there was a lot of luck in the way that your life turned out.

因为他们觉得这削弱了他们自身能力的作用。

Because I think that they think it's taking away from their skill elements.

但我们知道，你的生活之所以走向今天，运气确实起了很大作用。

But we know that there's a lot of luck in the way that your life turned out.

我先拿自己的经历说说吧。

I mean, I'll start with mine for a second.

我出生在美国。

I was born in America.

我的父母都拥有研究生学历。

Both my parents had graduate level degrees.

我出生在一个恰好的时代，在我这一生中，我有机会亲手触摸到电脑。

I was born at a certain time when during my lifetime I got to hold a computer in my hand.

我家里有自来水。

I had indoor plumbing.

我接种了疫苗，因此我童年时期死于传染病的风险比以前低得多。

I had vaccines so that my risk of death from an early childhood disease was much lower than it used to be.

所以，我可以一直说下去。

So, I mean, and I can go on and on.

显然，我出生的环境完全是运气使然。

And obviously, the circumstances of my birth are completely a matter of luck.

所以，如果我出生在18世纪，我的人生会非常不同。

So my life, if I had been born in the 1700s, would have been very different.

我肯定不会被允许从事我现在的职业。

I certainly wouldn't have been allowed to have the career that I had.

我的意思是，我甚至不会被允许拥有财产。

I mean, I wouldn't have been allowed to own property.

我们可以从这里开始。

We can start there.

你本会成为财产。

You would have been property.

是的，本会成为财产。

Yeah, would have been property.

没错。

Exactly.

所以我们知道，运气在其中扮演了很大角色，而我认为我们常常忽略的——这又回到了结果导向的问题——当我们过度将某人的成就归因于技能时，当我们认为‘这完全是技能的结果’时，我们忽视了有大量同样有技能的人，却因为运气不佳而未能取得相同的结果。

So, we know that there's a lot of luck involved, and I think that what we tend to miss, and this goes back to resulting, is that when we start to assign too much skill to somebody's outcomes, when we start to think, well, that was 100% skill, what we miss is that there's lots and lots of people who were just as skillful who did not have the same outcome mainly due to luck.

不过，也有很多人拥有同样的运气，却依然没有取得相同的结果。

And there are lots of people though with the same luck that also didn't have the same outcome.

当然了。

Oh, for sure.

而这就需要我们去平衡技能和运气各自的作用。

And that that's where you have to get into this balance of what the skill and luck are.

是的。

Yeah.

所以，举个例子，如果有100个人创办初创公司，我们知道大多数初创公司都会失败。

So, I mean, as an example, if you have a 100 people who have a start up, we know that most start ups fail.

我们知道其中80%会失败。

We know that 80% of them fail.

当然，有一部分失败是因为创业者本身能力不足。

Now, some percentage of those are gonna fail because entrepreneurs aren't particularly good.

对。

Right.

而一些成功的公司，是因为创业者确实非常出色。

Some percentage of the ones that succeed are going to succeed because the entrepreneurs are particularly good.

但我们也知道，有一部分失败的公司，其创业者实际上非常聪明。

But we also know that some percentage of the ones that fail, the entrepreneurs are actually quite brilliant.

由于一些他们难以控制的因素——比如初创公司本身固有的高波动性——他们恰好失败了。

And due to matters that are relatively under their out of their control, just the volatility of startups in the first place, they happen to fail.

我们知道，一些成功的人其实并没有那些失败者那么有才能。

And we know that some percentage of the people who do succeed are actually not as skillful as some of the ones who don't succeed.

对。

Right.

但这并不意味着，那些成功创办初创公司的人，你就该说他们只是运气好。

But that's not to say that the people who have successful startups that you're supposed to say, well, they just got lucky.

对吧？

Right?

当然，他们是很有能力的。

Of course, they were skillful.

天啊。

Gosh.

这是我们这个

This is We this

我们不应该犯这样的错误，以为他们拥有什么独家秘诀，第一，然后试图完全复制他们的做法。

don't wanna make the we don't wanna make the mistake of thinking that they have the secret sauce, number one, and you're supposed to try to replicate exactly what they do.

这很可能是一种混合因素。

It's probably a mix.

你也不应该拒绝那80%失败的人，说他们一定非常糟糕。

And you don't wanna reject the 80% of people that failed and say, well, they must be have been really bad.

上一季，《硅谷》真的探讨了所有这些内容。

The this last season, Silicon Valley really explored all that stuff.

是的。

Yes.

他们确实做到了。

They really did.

而且我特别喜欢这个剧。

And and I love that show,

顺便说一下。

by way.

但它也让我感同身受。

But it me too.

尤其是上一季，我完全沉浸其中。

Well, particularly this last season, I I was just taking with it.

但这引发了该系列中另一个问题，那就是试图控制变量，或者说是试图……

But but but it brings up the the another issue that that's going on in that series, which is sort of trying to control variables or trying to Mhmm.

对那些你无法控制的变量做点什么。

Do something with variables that are out of your control.

我们该怎么处理这一部分呢？

What do we do with that piece?

你提到了投资。

And you mentioned investing.

我在想，时间套利是你在投资中可以掌控的。

I was thinking to myself, well, time arbitrage is something you control in investing.

你是对的。

You Yeah.

说说看。

Tell

所以我认为，我们需要考虑两方面，对吧？

So I think that what we wanna think about is kind of two pieces, right?

我们希望认识到，有些事情注定超出我们的控制范围，我们对此无能为力。

We want to think there are certain things that are definitely going to be out of our control that we can't do anything about.

我们的任务是预判这些因素可能引发的一系列结果，以便提前制定应对方案。

Our job there is to anticipate the set of outcomes that those things might cause to happen so that we have a plan in place.

我认为其中一个问题是，我们总以为自己对未来的掌控力太强，因此实际上并未为潜在的负面情况做好充分准备。

I think that one of the issues is that we think we have too much control over the future, and so we're actually not prepare as prepared as we should be for the downside.

这很有趣。

It's it's interesting.

我总是对我的住院医师说，听着。

I always told my residents, I said, look.

做出你的决定。

Make your decisions.

我会为它们背书，但如果你没有应对这些决定失误的预案，我会让你吃不了兜着走。

I I'll stand behind them, but I'll kill you if you don't have a plan for should those be the wrong decisions.

永远都要有备选方案。

Always have a backup plan.

因为如果你没有计划，一旦出事，你就会在病人身上惹上大麻烦。

Because if you don't have a plan, if things go wrong, you're gonna get in big trouble with a patient.

对。

Right.

这正是被动应对和灵活应对之间的区别。

And that's the difference between being reactive and being nimble.

对吧？

Right?

我们不希望只是对事情的发展做出被动反应。

We don't wanna be just reacting to the way that things are turning out.

我们希望提前制定好计划，这样我们才能灵活应对，能够及时调整，并且已经预见到这种结果可能会发生。

We wanna have a plan in place in advance so that we're nimble, so that we can sort of shift around and we've got a plan in place and we sort of anticipated we've anticipated that, that outcome might occur.

我们对那些我们无法完全掌控的因素可能导致的不良后果，做出合理的概率估计——我们做出了最佳决策，但我们也知道，有时当我们通过绿灯时，可能会得到不准确的结果。

We've got some sort of estimate that's reasonable of the probability that that that bad outcome might occur, some set of bad outcomes might occur due to things that we don't really have a lot of control over, just we made the best decision and we know that sometimes when we go through the green light, we get an inaccurate

或者你做出了错误的决定。

Or you made a bad decision.

但确实如此。

But it it's still yes.

也可以，但没有备份。

It's okay too, but no backup.

真正的麻烦。

Real real trouble.

对。

Right.

我们能掌控的地方在于，我有个特别在意的观点，就是人们常说：你不觉得你是自己创造运气的吗？

So where we do have a lot of control is and this is where like, I have this pet peeve where people say, don't you think you make your own luck?

我说：这不可能。

And I'm like, Impossible.

这就是运气的定义，因为你无法创造它。

That's the definition of luck because you can't make it.

是的。

Yeah.

这是完全超出你控制范围的事情。

Something that's totally out of your control.

但你所做的是做出自己的决定，而这些决定如果执行得好，其美妙之处就在于你能降低不良结果发生的概率。

But what you do, do is make your own decisions and the decisions that you make, if they're actually executed well, this is where the beauty is that you reduce the probability of the bad outcomes occurring.

是的。

Yes.

所以当你做出决定时，你实际上可以改变不同未来结果的概率。

So you do have when you make a decision, you can actually change the probability of different sets of futures.

这正是决定的定义所在。

That's kind of what the definition of deciding is.

你面临选择A或选择B，选择A会带来一组可能的未来结果，而这些结果有各自相应的概率。

You have choice A or choice B, and choice A has some set of possible futures that will result from it, and that set of possible futures have certain probabilities associated with them.

而选择B可能拥有完全相同的可能未来结果，但概率分布不同。

And choice B has maybe the exact same set of possible futures, but the probabilities are different.

也可能它带来的是不同的可能未来，而且这些未来也不同。

Maybe it has a different set of possible futures, but they're different.

这就是你所能掌控的。

And that's the control that you have.

这就是你所创造的。

That's what you make.

你无法创造自己的运气。

You don't make your own luck.

你做出的决定确实能改变不同结果发生的概率。

You make your own decisions that actually changes the probability of different outcomes occurring.

我认为，一旦你真正理解了这一点，你就不会那么容易陷入‘我本该知道’、‘我为什么没预见到’、‘反正也无能为力’、‘我根本没料到，现在也没计划’这样的想法。

And I think that once you really understand that, you get much less into this idea of like, I should have known, why didn't I see that coming, well, couldn't have done anything about it anyway, I never saw that coming and now I don't have a plan.

你也不会陷入‘反正我做什么都没用，那我干脆不试了’这种消极心态。

And you don't sort of get into this sort of shrugging of, well, it doesn't really matter what I do anyway, so I'm just not even gonna try.

哎哟。

Oof.

这太糟了。

That's bad.

为什么要试坏的呢？

Why try it bad?

是的。

Yeah.

如果你在找车，你可能熟悉像MSRP、经销商价格、标价这样的术语。

If you're looking for a car, you're probably familiar with terms like MSRP or dealer price, list price.

我不知道你怎么样，但我完全不明白这些术语是什么意思，我觉得它们就是为了让我们困惑。

I I don't know about you, but I have no idea what all this stuff means, and I believe it's there just to confuse all of us.

你真正需要的是真实价格，实际价格，而现在你有了一个有意义的东西。

What you really want is the true price, the actual price, and now you have something that is meaningful.

这是来自TrueCar的真实价格。

It is true price from TrueCar.

在你去经销商之前，你就能确切知道你想要的车的总价，包括税费和配件。

You can know exactly what you'll pay for the car you want, including fees and accessories before you ever get to the dealership.

TrueCar的经销商会向你展示你想要的那种车的真实价格，而且这一切都可以在你家或任何地方舒适地完成。

TrueCar dealers will show you the true price on cars like the one you want, and it's all from the comfort of your own home or wherever you are.

你可以看到这个真实价格，并且知道这个真实价格非常划算，因为首先，TrueCar 会向你展示其他人购买相同车型的实际支付价格；其次，TrueCar 认证的经销商也了解这一点，因此他们会设定具有竞争力的真实价格来赢得你的青睐。

You can see that true price and you know the true price is a great price because a, TrueCar shows you what other people paid for the same car you want, and b's, TrueCar certified dealers know this, so they set their true price competitively so they will win your business.

所以记住，当你准备购买新车或二手车时，别忘了 TrueCar 上的二手车也同样享有真实价格，无论新车还是二手车，TrueCar 都为你提供真实价格。

So remember, when you're ready to buy new or used, don't forget used cars as well at TrueCar, Same true price, new or used, TrueCar.

享受更自信的购车体验，部分功能在部分州可能不可用。

Enjoy a more confident car buying experience with some features not available in all states.

Hydralyte 是我最钟爱的补水产品，无论是夏天在烈日下暴晒后，还是现在夏天快结束了，可能是在运动时，或者你开始更多地外出跑步时。

Well, Hydralyte, you know, is my favorite rehydration product whether it is because of just laying out in the heat during the summer, but it's the end of summer now, so maybe it's during exercise or maybe you're getting out there and running a little more.

这是一款出色的产品。

It is a stunning product.

这才是正确保持水分的方式。

It's the proper way to stay hydrated.

你需要的是钠、葡萄糖和水的恰当配比，而 Hydralyte 在这方面做得比任何其他产品都更好，比运动饮料更优，也比单纯喝水更有效。

You need the proper balance of sodium, glucose, and water, and Hydralyte simply does this better than anybody, better than sports drinks, and it's better than water alone.

你所需要的不仅仅是水。

You need not just water.

你需要溶质。

You need solute.

再次强调，钠、葡萄糖、水。

Again, sodium, glucose, water.

Hydralyte 是我见过的最好的口服补液产品，它的神奇之处在于多种口味，比如橙子浆果柠檬水，以及它的包装设计。

Hydralyte is the best oral rehydration product I've ever seen, and it comes part of the the part of the magic of Hydralyte is all the different flavors, orange berry lemonade, and how it's presented.

它有预混饮料、粉剂，还有这些可随身携带的泡腾片，只需放入一瓶水中，就能立即获得一款方便携带的优质补液产品。

It's in a premixed drink, a powder, or these little effervescent tablets you can carry with you and just drop into a glass bottle of water, and you have an optimal rehydration product right there that you carry with you.

与运动饮料相比，Hydralyte 提供的电解质高达四倍，而糖分却减少了 75%。

Compared to sports drinks, Hydralyte delivers up to four times the electrolytes with 75% less sugar.

这些解决方案适合所有年龄段的人群。

The solutions are appropriate for all ages.

它是一种瓶装或包装产品。

It's a bottle or a package.

使用说明简单易懂。

It's easy easy to follow instructions.

你可以在Rite Aid或hydralyte.com/doctordrew上找到Hydralyte。

You can find Hydralyte at Rite Aid or hydralyte.com/doctordrew.

此外，针对我们的听众，限时优惠可节省30美元购买Hydralyte。

And for limited time for our listeners, you can save 30 on Hydralyte.

只需点击我网站doctordrew.com上的横幅即可。

Just click the banner on my website at doctordrew.com.

结账时使用代码DRDRAW18。

Use the code DRDRAW18 at checkout.

你可以访问Hydralyte.com/doctorDrew，然后使用doctorDrew18代码，或者直接访问我的网站并点击横幅链接。

That is either Hydralyte dot com slash doctor Drew, and then use the doctor Drew 18 code, or just go to my website and click through on the banner.

结账时使用的代码是doctorDrew18。

And, again, the checkout code is doctor drew 18.

你可以以优惠价节省30%购买这款优质产品。

You'll save 30% on a great product.

我在研究你的资料时注意到，有一种叫做Kudo系统的东西。

And I noticed that in my research I have on you, there's something called the Kudo system.

这是不是属于另一个不同的东西，还是说我们谈的就是这个？

Is that part of Is that is there something different than this, or is that this we're talking about?

是的。

So yeah.

所以我认为，对于不熟悉的人来说，KUDOS 是一个缩写，由一位名叫罗伯特·默顿的人提出，他是最初的社会心理学家之一。

So I think that this what what goes into this is so for people who aren't familiar, so KUDOS is an acronym, that was a guy named Robert Merton came up with it and Robert Merton is one of the original social psychologists.

他当时想强调的是，这些要素是你在群体中实现卓越科学探索所必需的。

And he was really trying to get across, like, we these are what you need in order to instantiate really good scientific endeavor in a group.

所以，KUDOS 中的 C 代表共产主义，意思是你们必须共享细节。

So, kudos stands for C is communism, which means that you have to share the details.

举个例子，如果我想寻求一个决策的建议，我去找你，说：‘嘿，德鲁，我想请你帮我做这个决定’，那我就必须把决策的全部细节告诉你。

So if we think about if I'm trying to get help with a decision and I go to you and I say, Hey, Drew, I want you to help me with this decision, I need to share the details of the decision with you.

如果我们遗漏了某些信息——而我们常常会这么做——尤其是会刻意忽略那些与我们希望达成的立场相矛盾的信息。

If I leave certain things out, which we tend to do, we particularly leave things out that don't argue for the position that we'd really like to come to.

对。

Right.

所以我说，比如我在决定选a还是b，如果我更倾向于a，我就会倾向于忽略那些支持b的细节。

So I'm saying, like, I'm trying to decide between a and b, I I'll have a tendency to leave the details out if I prefer a that would support b.

明白了。

Got it.

对吧？

Right?

是的。

Yep.

所以是完全的公有共享。

So so complete communalism.

对。

Right.

所以这里的共产主义显然不是指政治意义上的共产主义，而是指如果我们打算共同做出决策——无论是科学领域的还是个人生活中的——对吧，我们也可以组成一个个人决策共同体。

So so obviously communism not in the sense of the political sense, but in the sense of if we're gonna have a decision making community together, a scientific one or or personal, right, we could form a personal decision making community.

那么我就需要把细节跟你分享，而如果你认真参与其中，就会问我：有没有什么你没提到的、可能反驳你观点的信息？

Then I need to be sharing the details with you and you, if you're engaging in this very well, will ask me questions like is there anything that you left out that might argue against your case?

对。

Right.

有什么是你没说的吗？因为那让你感到不舒服，或者你觉得那样会让你显得不那么好？

Is there anything that you didn't say because it made you uncomfortable or you felt like it put you in an unflattering light?

所以你会帮助我找出那些我应该与你分享的内容。

So you're going to help me along in identifying the things that I'm supposed to be sharing with you.

这就是C。

So that's the C.

U是普遍性，你可以把它理解为‘不要责怪传信人’的反面。

The U is universalism and you can think about it as the flip side of don't shoot the messenger.

这指的是‘不要责怪信息本身’。

This would be don't shoot the message.

所以，假设两个人具有同等的专业水平，无论你是否喜欢这个传信人，都不会影响其信息的真假。

So the idea is outside, assuming that two people are of equal expertise, whether you like the messenger or not does not mean that their message is true or false.

对。

Right.

所以意思是，无论这是我的最好的朋友还是我最讨厌的敌人，都没关系，是的。

So the idea would be it doesn't really matter whether it's my best friend or my worst enemy Yes.

告诉我地球是圆的，地球依然是圆的。

Telling me that the earth is round, the earth is round nonetheless.

好的。

Okay.

我明白了。

I get it.

对。

Right.

所以我们不应该看信息时说，比如，这个来自我支持的政党，所以我相信；那个来自我不喜欢的政党，所以我就不相信。

So we don't wanna look at messages and say, for example, this one's coming from a political party that I prefer, so therefore I believe it, or this one's coming from the political party that I don't like, and so therefore I disbelieve it.

这几乎是不可能的。

This is almost impossible.

信息本身。

The information independently.

对于那些没有接受过这方面训练的人来说，这几乎是不可能的。

And this is particularly people that aren't trained to do this, almost impossible for them to do.

对。

Right.

没错。

Exactly.

所以，一个很好的做法是，你可以应用这种结果盲视的理念：我可以问你关于我读到的这件事，但不告诉你它来自民主党还是共和党。

So one of the great things, you can sort of apply this idea of outcome blindness to this, is that I can go ask you about this thing that I read and not tell you that it came from a Democrat or a Republican.

我的意思是，科学家是经过训练的，每当我听到关于认知失调这类说法时，我总是想，哦，我其实不会那样做。

I mean, scientists are trained to to I I whenever I hear about this in sort of cognitive, dissonance and stuff, I I always think, oh, I don't really do that.

但我又想，哦，我确实受过训练，不会那样做。

But I thought, oh, I'm I'm really trained not to do that.

我的意思是，我是个科学家。

I mean, I'm a scientist.

你知道，你接受了严格的训练，要客观地进行评估。

You know, you were carefully trained to evaluate just objectively.

请只看事实，女士。

Just look at the facts, ma'am.

是的。

Yeah.

而且你现在确实能在政治讨论中看到这种现象，人们试图让别人以一种普遍的方式思考。

And you you actually see this in the political discourse now, people sort of trying to get people to think in a universal way.

他们总是这样做，为了支持自己的立场。

They always do it to argue for their own side.

对。

Right.

但你会发现，如果人们不喜欢特朗普说的某件事，或者不喜欢特朗普做的某件事，他们想让共和党人也不喜欢时，就会说：想象一下如果奥巴马做了这件事。

But you'll see if people don't like something that Trump said, they'll if they don't like something that Trump did and they're trying to get a Republican to not like it as well, they'll say, imagine if Obama did it.

是的。

Yeah.

对。

Yeah.

反之亦然。

If and likewise, the reverse.

如果他们想让你喜欢特朗普做的某件事，他们会说，想象一下如果奥巴马做了这件事。

If if they're trying to get you to like something that Trump did, they'll say, imagine if Obama did it.

对。

Right.

所以这在两个方向上都适用。

So it kind of works both ways.

你可以看到人们在这方面真的很差，因为他们往往忽视这一点。

And you can see that people are really bad at it because they sort of dismiss that.

但事实是，存在一种客观真理，它独立于说出它的人。

But the fact is that there is an objective truth and it is independent of the person who says it.

是的。

Yep.

所以这就是你那部分。

So that's the you piece.

而D代表的是无偏见，所以kudos，C-U-D，就是无偏见。

And then the D piece is disinterestedness, so it's kudos, C U D, is disinterestedness.

这就涉及到了结果盲区的许多问题，以及我向你提供我的观点时的情况。

So this gets into a lot of this kind of the problem with outcome blindness and me offering my opinion to you.

明白了。

Got it.

我们通常把利益冲突理解为经济利益冲突，但其实我们有一个根深蒂固的利益冲突：我们希望自己的信念是正确的。

So we think about conflicts of interest in general as financial conflicts of interest, but we have this really built in conflict of interest is that we want our beliefs to be right.

对，现在希望它们能说得通。

See, want now them to make sense.

你刚才说了一句话，自从我听到你这么说之后，我就一直在用它来讨论这个问题。

Now you said something that I have used since I heard you say it on this on this issue.

我多次跟别人提起过这句话，我想感谢你提供了这个观点，我也会明确注明这是你的说法。

And and I've brought it up a number of times with people, and I wanna thank you for it, and I will give you attribution for it.

但作为一名科学家，重要的是准确，而不是正确。

But as a scientist, it's more important to be accurate than to be right.

当我听到你这么说时，我对自己说：哦，原来这就是我不在意这些认知失调现象的原因，因为我根本不在乎自己是否正确。

And I thought to myself, when I heard you say that, I thought, oh, well, that's why I'm not bothered by all these these, cognitive dissonant things because because I I don't care about being right.

我在乎的是准确性，但不仅仅是准确，还包括正确运用我的科学训练和准确性。

I care about being accurate, but being and being not just accurate, but also proper application of my scientific training and accurate.

你明白我的意思吗？

You know what mean?

这是两件不同的事情。

Which are two different things.

举个例子，一方面是我是否正确地执行了过程，是否努力追求准确。

You know, one is I doing my my process properly, and I'm trying to be accurate.

而我究竟是对是错，我可能很多时候都是错的。

And if I'm right or wrong, that's I'm I'm probably gonna be wrong a lot of the time.

大多数时候都是错的。

Most of the time.

我是个科学家。

I'm a scientist.

你总是错的。

You're always wrong.

总有人会驳倒你。

Somebody's gonna disprove you.

这不重要。

Doesn't matter.

但这就是训练。

But that's training.

作为一名科学家，如果你知道有人掌握了能驳倒你假设的信息，却故意不告诉你，你会认为这对你是极大的伤害。

And As a scientist, if you knew that somebody had information that disproved your hypothesis and that they didn't tell you it, you would consider that to be of great harm to you.

另一方面，如果有人掌握了能驳倒我的理论或假设的信息，我会心怀感激。

On the other hand, if they have information that will disprove my theory or hypothesis, I'm grateful.

谢谢你。

Thank you.

对。

Right.

谢谢。

Thank you.

你正在扩展到。

You're expanding to.

你不仅很好，而且还在拓展我的现实感。

You're well, not only that, but you're expanding my sense of reality.

我正在越来越接近真相。

It's I'm I'm getting closer to the truth.

没错。

Exactly.

这其实是个大问题，因为我们大多数人与世界互动的方式都希望证明自己是对的，也就是说，当别人反对我们时，我们会感到受伤。

So and this is actually a really big problem because most of us actually interact with the world in a way that we wanna be right, meaning that when people disagree with us, it hurts our feelings.

而且人们多少都知道这一点，所以当他们拥有与我们相悖的信息时，如果他们是我们的朋友，通常就不会提供出来。

And people kind of know this, so when they have information that disagrees with us, if they're our friends, they generally won't It's offer it

最糟糕的。

the worst.

试着改变你的想法，说不。

And trying to change your thinking to say no.

等等。

Wait.

你不明白。

You don't understand.

如果你有与我相悖的信息却不提出来，你就是在伤害我。

If you have information that disagrees with me and you don't speak up, you're harming me.

安妮，我时间真的快到了。

Annie, I'm actually running out of time.

我只剩下五分钟和你聊了。

I've got five more minutes with you.

那我们赶紧做个总结，致谢。

So let's finish up kudos.

好的。

Yeah.

不偏不倚，利益冲突。

Disinterestedness, conflict of interest.

是的。

Yeah.

我们都想证明自己是对的。

We all wanna be right.

所以如果我表达

So if I communicate

我不想证明自己是对的。

I don't wanna be right.

当我问你

Where I'm asking you

我不想证明自己是对的。

I don't wanna be right.

告诉你我的观点

Tell you what my belief

但我并不想赢。

But I don't wanna be right.

当人们这么说的时候，我就想，我根本不在乎谁对谁错。

I I when people say that, I'm just like, I'm not interested in being right.

我关心的是准确性。

I'm interested in being accurate.

我觉得这是对的。

I think that's right.

所以这正是关键。

So this is exactly.

所以这就是我们达成共识的方式。

So this is how we get there.

当我与你沟通时，如果我不告诉你我的观点

If when I communicate you, I don't tell you what my beliefs are

是的。

Yeah.

我只是问你的看法，我已经把我的利益冲突排除在外了。

I just ask for your opinion, I've taken my own conflict of interest out of it.

这样可以吗？

Is that o?

这就是d。

That is the d.

那是不偏不倚。

That's disinterested.

好的。

Okay.

D。

D.

因为不偏不倚意味着你不想存在利益冲突。

Because disinterestedness is that you don't wanna have a conflict of interest.

是的。

Yes.

你希望保持客观中立。

You wanna be disinterested.

明白了。

Got

就是这样。

it.

而OS中的赞誉是客观的怀疑态度。

And then the OS in kudos is objective skepticism

嗯。

Mhmm.

这意味着你看待世界时会问：我哪里错了？对。

Which means that you approach the world asking why am I wrong Yes.

而不是问：我哪里对了。

Rather than why am I right.

是的。

Yes.

这实际上非常深刻且极其重要。

And that's actually incredibly deep and incredibly important.

这是通俗流行的。

It's pop Poplarian.

是的。

Yes.

没错。

Exactly.

对。

Yeah.

科学家的核心就是证伪。

Scientist is all about disproving things.

人们不明白这一点。

People don't get that.

他们以为这是关于

They think it's about

证明事情。

proving things.

所以我总是想知道，当我跟人交谈时，我告诉他们，嗯，这是我的假设。

So I always wanna know, like, when I'm talking to people and I give them, you know, I say, well, here's my hypothesis.

我会问，为什么我会错？

I say, why but why am I wrong?

这才是我想知道的。

That's what I wanna know.

是的。

Yeah.

因为我已经知道我是对的。

Because I already know I am right.

我知道我为什么会得出这个假设。

I know why I came to

这个假设。

the hypothesis.

人们不再使用零假设了。

That people don't use the null hypothesis anymore.

他们似乎不再使用它了。

They don't seem to use it.

我明白。

I understand

他们确实不使用了。

that They don't.

它有一些问题，但我接受的训练就是基于这个的。

There are things with it, but I I was trained on that.

这就是我开始的方式。

That's that's where I start.

比如，为什么我会知道？让我们假设我是错的，然后试着和我一起探讨。

Like, why am I know, let's assume I'm wrong and then try to work with me.

我该如何证明我是错的？

How would I prove that I'm wrong?

是的

Yeah.

对

Yes.

没错

Exactly.

所以你可以思考一下如何把这些方法融入到你的日常生活中。

So you can think about how you can bring these into just your everyday life.

对吧？

Right?

我的意思是，我们已经讨论过这个了。

I mean, I've we've talked about this.

比如，多问问别人：你为什么觉得我错了？

Like, ask people a lot, why do you think I'm wrong?

告诉我我在这里哪里出错了。

Tell tell me where I'm going wrong here.

我忽略了什么？

What am I not seeing?

是的。

Yeah.

你不能告诉别人你的信念。

You cannot tell people your beliefs.

你不能告诉别人事情的结果如何。

You cannot tell people how things turned out.

这会消除利益冲突。

That takes the conflict of interest away.

当你询问你读过的内容时，不要告诉他们来源。

When you're asking about something that you read, don't tell them the source.

这体现了普遍性原则并使其具体化。

That takes the universalism piece and instantiates it.

当你提供决策过程所需细节时，确保你提供那些让你感到不适的内容。

When you're offering up the details that somebody needs of a decision process, make sure that you're offering up the things that make you uncomfortable.

确保你提供那些你认为可能支持另一方观点的内容。

Make sure that you're offering up the things that you feel like might argue for the other side.

这些是最关键的细节。

Those are the most important details to offer.

安妮，这些内容都在《思考》这本书里吗？

And, Annie, is this all in the book, Thinking

这些都在书里。

This is all in the book.

好的。

Alright.

所以去买这本书吧。

So get the book.

在亚马逊上有售。

It's on Amazon.

到处都能买到。

It's everywhere.

我会把它放在我的网站上，书名是《思考在赌注中》。

I'll have it up on my website, Thinking in in Bets.

如果你需要回顾，可以再次收听播客并对照阅读。

And if you need to revisit, let you listen to the podcast again and read along.

在最后剩下的几分钟里，书中还有哪些我们想要关注或标出的重点呢？

And what is it just in the last remaining minutes, other things in the book that we wanna look for, highlight?

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得是的。

I think so.

我的意思是，书中提到了动机性推理的问题，我认为这是一个每个人都应该关注的概念，即我们常常没有意识到，自己往往是在朝着一个早已想达成的结论进行推理。

I mean, there's there's an issue about motivated reasoning, which I think is a concept that people really should look at, which is this unawareness that we have that we're very often reasoning toward a conclusion that we already want to get to.

最后我想说的是，在不确定性这一部分，真正能让你把不确定性清晰呈现出来的方法之一，就是问问自己：我愿意为此下注吗？

And then the last thing I would say is, on this uncertainty piece, one of the things that actually allows you to bubble up the uncertainty to the surface in a really good way is if you actually ask yourself, would I be willing to bet on this?

我强烈建议大家尝试一下这种方法。

And I really encourage people to try this.

举个我经常和别人做的好例子。

Like, here's a good example that I've done with people.

人们在谈论中期选举时会说：我觉得民主党会赢得众议院。

So people are talking about the midterms and they'll say, I think the Democrats are going to take the House.

如果你问他们：那你愿意为此下注吗？

And if you say to them, oh, do you want to bet on that?

你可以看到他们的不确定性开始浮现，对吧？

You can watch the uncertainty start to come up, right?

当他们说：哦，等等，那还远着呢。

When they're like, oh, well, wait, it's really far away.

我不太确定。

I'm not sure.

等等，让我查一下民调，看看民主党现在的支持率如何。

Wait, let me go look at the polls to see how the Democrats are polling just a second.

一旦我们开始把不确定性带入系统，我们所有人就会成为更好的决策者，因为这更准确地反映了现实，而真相就是：事情并非非黑即白。

And once we start to bring the uncertainty into the system, we all become better decision makers because it's just a more accurate representation of the world and it's a more accurate representation of the truth is that things aren't black and white.

它们不是百分之百或零%

They're not a 100%, 0%.

你甚至可以用这种方法对待孩子。

And you can even do this with your kids.

我有一些朋友开始用这种方法，他们的孩子会说，我不想去看那部电影。

I've had friends who started using this, and their kid will say, I don't wanna go to that movie.

我会讨厌它的。

I'm gonna hate it.

于是父母会问，那你愿意为此打个赌吗？

And the parent will say, well, do you wanna bet on that?

突然间，孩子变得更有开放心态了。

And all of a sudden, the kid becomes more open minded.

有意思。

Interesting.

我喜欢这个。

I like that.