#872：格雷厄姆·邓肯——天赋是最优质的资产类别（重播）

因为生活中的很多事情都是这样。

Because a lot of life is like this.

或者有没有什么案例或例子，不点名，但

Or if there are any cases, any examples, not naming names, but

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得关键在于，只要有必要，就先保留这些相互矛盾的看法，慢慢理清它们。

I think it's a matter of holding those contradictory perspectives as long as you need to to make sense of them.

对我而言，我妻子和我的生意伙伴有时会觉得我优柔寡断，因为我能容忍这种模糊性——一个人可能在某方面极其出色，但与此同时，他的缺陷也紧挨着他的天赋。

And so for me, my wife, my business partner, can experience me as indecisive at times because I am so tolerant of holding the ambiguity on somebody being really good at something because everyone's genius is right next to their dysfunction, I think.

所以在你真正看清楚之前，这种状态可能会让人很不安；有时候你就是没法彻底弄明白，那也没关系，根本不需要强行做决定。

And so until you're clear on it, it can feel and sometimes you you just don't get clear, in which case there's no need to do anything.

但我处理这种情况的一个核心方法，就是多花时间跟他们相处。

But one central strategy I have of dealing with that is just spending more time with them.

比如我们一起去冲浪，那些惊险的旅程里，我们差点丧命，正是在那些时候，我们真正了解了彼此。

You know, we got to know each other well on these intense surfing trips where we almost drowned.

我差点把你头砍下来，结果俩人都食物中毒了。

I almost beheaded you, and then we got food poisoning.

总的来说，我喜欢。

And I like in general

欢迎来到俱乐部天堂。

Welcome to club paradise.

是的。

Yeah.

我不喜欢待在会议室里，听人隔着桌子给你推销东西，我更喜欢换个环境跟人互动。

I I like getting out of the conference room and not being pitched something across the table, and I like creating other context to interact with people.

如果存在模糊或犹豫的地方，我们就跟他们一起看看这个投资。

If there's ambiguity or ambivalence, we'll look at an investment with them.

如果你能亲眼看着一个人实际操作，就能学到很多，看他用什么思维模型来做判断。

If you look at something that's live with somebody, you learn so much about how they're actually underwriting it, the mental models they're using.

你觉得

What do you

你这里说的‘承销’具体是指什么？

mean by underwriting it in this case?

‘承销’这个词用在做投资决策时，指的是一个人或者一个交易团队为了有底气去推荐某个价格的投资项目，所做的一整套分析工作。

So underwriting is a term used in the context of making an investment decision, and it refers to the body of work that an individual or, say, a deal team has done to get comfortable advocating for an investment at a particular price.

所以人们会说，根据我的承销分析，这个项目的回报相对于风险来说很有吸引力。

And so people will say, based on my underwriting, returns are attractive relative to risk in this case.

当他们说‘我的承销’时，其实是在用自己的声誉为这些预测背书，也意味着他们要对这个分析的结果负责。

And by saying my underwriting, they are putting their personal reputation behind the projections, and they're taking ownership of the outcome of that analysis.

比如，如果我们正在看华盛顿特区一家潜在酒店的房地产投资，而不是通过基金投资，当我们考虑引入新合伙人时，我们会花大量时间亲自去研究这家酒店，搞清楚这个项目方是怎么评估这个投资的。

So if if we were looking at a real estate investment in Washington DC in a potential hotel, we would rather than investing in a fund, we would, if we're getting a new partner, spend a lot of time on that literally looking at that hotel investment and understanding the how the sponsor is looking at the investment.

通过这种方式，你就能明白，他们真正关注的是什么。

And in that way, you get to know, oh, this is what they're really focused on.

他们的优势在哪，可能哪些地方是短板，我们也得留意。

This is what their strengths are, and maybe we should keep an eye out for these weaknesses.

或者，如果我们投资了他们的基金，这些点就是我们后续要持续关注的。

Or if we make the investment in a fund of theirs, this is something we'd keep an eye on.

为了帮助那些还没把前后联系起来的人，我想请你确认一下：你的客户其实是有限合伙人和家族办公室，对吧？

Just for people who may not have put the pieces together, I want you to correct me here, but you're in effect you have, as clients, your limited partners, family offices.

这些是希望你帮他们挑选不同投资团队的富裕家庭，而你就像一位教练，负责挑选队员。

So these are wealthy families who want your help in then choosing different investment teams, and you are, in a way, I suppose, the the team coach who is selecting the players.

是的。

Yeah.

我们与少数几个家庭合作，他们深入了解我们，并信任我们担任他们的外部首席投资官。

So we work with a handful of families who get to know us well and trust us to be their outsourced chief investment officer.

他们基本上把个人财产之外的所有财富交由我们全权管理，我们将这些资金整合成一个投资组合，并在不同资产类别中分散配置。

They basically give us full investment discretion over their wealth outside of their personal property, and we manage that as one pool for them and diversify it across asset classes.

我们会用这个资金池投资，比如西雅图的一个商业地产项目，这是我们与当地房地产合作伙伴共同推进的；或者投资于全球顶尖团队管理的对冲基金。

So we invest that pool in, say, a commercial real estate project in Seattle that we make with our real estate partners that are local there or in hedge fund partnerships run by the best teams we can fund all over the world.

如果有人管理一只基金，我们就会去评估这只基金。

So if somebody's got a fund, we'll look at their fund.

如果他们设立了一个特殊目的载体，用于投资上市公司证券或私募项目，我们也会仔细审查。

If they have an SPV, a special purpose vehicle where they're investing in a publicly traded security or a private investment, we'll look at that.

如果他们想成立基金，我们会帮他们成立。

If they wanna start a fund, we'll help them start a fund.

如果他们不需要我们在种子轮提供资金，只是希望找到独立、正常的有限合伙人，我们也会这么做。

If they don't need our capital in a seed context, but they just are looking for arm's length, normal limited partners, we'll do that.

所以我们会尽量保持灵活和开放的心态。

So we try to be as opportunistic and open minded as possible about it.

在你最终选中的那些表现优秀的人才中，还有没有其他什么共同特点？

Are there any other patterns that you've spotted in the talent you end up selecting that does well?

我问这个的原因是，根据我观察到的情况——虽然这不是我熟悉的领域，但我一直在旁边看着。

And the reason I ask is that from what I've observed, and this is not my world, but just hanging out on the sidelines Yeah.

偶尔从我对您工作的理解来看，您是在挑选投资者，而他们未必是顶尖的。

Every once in a while, glancing over at my perception of what you do is that you're picking folks, meaning investors, who are they're not tper necessarily.

对吧？

Right?

我的意思是，他们可能算是新秀里的佼佼者，或者这么说也不太准确，但您对这些人的了解可能并没有那么多数据支撑。

I mean, they are kind of rookie MVPs, or maybe that's not the right description, but you may not have a ton of data on these folks.

你尽管指正，别客气。

Feel free to, in fact, correct any of that.

那除了这些，还有没有其他常见特征，是那些你选中后表现特别出色的人身上反复出现的？

So are there any other characteristics that seem to pop up more often than not in the people who end up doing well that you select?

除了刚才说的那股冲劲和谦逊之间的平衡，我还注意到另一对特质：原创性和优先级判断。

I'd say in addition to that aggression, humility tension, a second one I think about is originality and triage are these two.

我们发现，表现最出色的那些人，往往想法特别多。

So we've noticed that the people who do best tend to have lots of ideas.

有一位叫迪恩·西蒙顿的学者，研究过各个领域的天才，他发现，不管是巴赫还是其他科学家，他们的作品数量普遍是普通人的上百倍。

There's a academic named Dean Simonton who studied genius across field, and he observed that whether it was Bach or any given scientist, the the sheer number of compositions that Bach had were, like, 100 times more than average composers.

其中有些作品其实质量平平，甚至不如同时代的其他人，但与此同时，他也创作出了不少杰作。

And some of his lousy pieces of of music were inferior to his peers at the time, but then he also ended up with some great pieces.

所以，想法的数量和原创性，确实是这类人的共同特点。

So there's something around just sheer quantity of ideas and original thinking that characterizes a lot of them.

具体来说，你从他们说话的方式就能看出来。

Specifically, you'll notice that in the language that people use.

我觉得在任何领域，当你开始达到精通时，人们往往会创造出属于自己的表达方式，来捕捉那些让他们脱颖而出的细微差别。

So I feel like in any field, I think, when you start to achieve mastery, you start often people start creating their own language to capture the nuance that they're seeing that makes them good at their thing.

在投资管理领域，巴菲特就像是这个行业的莎士比亚，大家都活在他的语言和思维模型里，甚至有点被局限住了。

And investment management, Buffett is kind of the Shakespeare of the industry, and everybody is living in his language and in his mental models to the point where it's limiting.

有时候我会遇到一个25岁的人说，我正拿着现金等最佳机会，但我真分不清他是真的懂巴菲特，还是只是在背台词。

So I feel like a 25 year old sometimes will be saying, I'm sitting on cash just waiting for the fat pitch, And I can't tell whether he knows he's quoting Buffett or not.

没错。

True.

就算他有意识地在这么做，他依然被困在这个非常有用的框架里。

Even if he's doing it consciously, he's living in this construct, which is a super useful construct.

但如果他将来真成了自己这一代的标杆，那他未来二十年里，一定会发展出属于自己的新语言。

But if he proceeds to become the temper of his generation, he'll generate his own language over the course of the subsequent twenty years.

所以当一个人满嘴行话、陈词滥调，说的话听起来一点都不像他自己时，我觉得这说明他还太早了，可能还需要更多历练，我们通常会再等等。

And so when people use a lot of jargon and cliches and language that at times doesn't feel like their own, to me, that's a sign that maybe they're a little bit earlier and they could use another stage of apprenticeship or that we would probably wait till a later stage.

而第二个特点，当一个人想法很多的时候，他们往往不太擅长放弃那些不好的想法。

And then that second component, when people have lots of ideas, they're usually not that good at killing them.

所以这是一种带有优先级判断的注意力，你看啊。

So it's attention with this triage mentality of, look.

我在这儿就是为了赚钱。

I'm here to make money.

总得有人在这里出局。

Somebody's gonna die here.

我要救这些可怜的人，让这个人放弃。

I'm gonna save these poor people and let this guy die.

对吧？

Right?

这种优先级判断，算不算一种高度的形势判断？

Is that triage high situational awareness.

我此刻正在做实时的取舍。

I'm making live trade offs here.

我觉得真正优秀的基金经理都有这个本事——能给投资组合排个先后，果断放弃自己的想法。

I think that's a quality that really good portfolio managers have where they can force rank their portfolio and they can kill their own ideas.

这种事你经常能看到。

You see that often.

再回到进取心这个问题上，我曾经面试过一个人，我常问的问题是：如果你要招一个分析师，你会看重哪些特质？

And then just back to aggressiveness, I was interviewing a guy and one question I like to ask people is, if you are hiring an analyst, what criteria are you looking for in the analyst?

那些有管理资金和团队经验的人，会特别留意分析师身上那些能让他们觉得最有价值的特质。

And people who've been managing money and managing people before begin to look for things in their analysts that make those analysts most valuable to them.

所以，他们回答这个问题的方式，往往能透露出一些关键信号。

And so there's often signal in the way they answer that.

这个人说，我找的是那种让我自己都感到一丝恐惧的特质——这个人会不会来取代我？

And this guy said, you know, what I'm looking for is a trace of fear in myself that this guy is coming for me, that he will replace me.

我觉得他抓住了那种极致的专注和执着，这种特质在任何领域都只属于少数人，因为他们找到了真正想玩的游戏，然后全身心投入其中。

And I think what he's capturing is that level of intensity, that obsessiveness that you see in a minority probably in any field because of just they've found their game, the game they wanna play, and they bring an intensity and obsessiveness to it.

久而久之，他们付出的努力远超常人。

And that over time, they're just working so much harder.

就像韦恩·格雷茨基五岁就找到了冰球这项运动一样。

It's like Wayne Gretzky finding you know, hockey at age five.

对吧？

Right?

他就是着了魔，一遍又一遍地琢磨。

Like, he's obsessed, and he's just going over and over and over again.

金融圈里真有这样的人。

And there are people in the finance industry who are like that.

他们对投资有着一种特别执着的态度。

They're just obsessed with investing in this really distinctive way.

沃伦·巴菲特从小就着了魔。

Warren Buffet is from a young age, obsessed.

约翰·阿诺德也是，着了魔。

John Arnold, obsessed.

你刚才提到

You mentioned

我想回头再聊一点，我觉得我应该没理解错——你提到巴菲特用的那些术语和表达方式，他推广了这些说法，别人就跟着照搬，这让你怀疑，这些人到底是真懂，还是只是在复述一个备受尊敬的人的话？

something I want to come back to for a second, which I don't think I'll misrepresent, and I think I'll probably get it, but you mentioned Buffett and the terminology and the language, the phrasing that he popularizes or originates and popularizes and how people can parrot that and leading you to wonder whether they really understand what they're speaking about or simply repeating something from someone who's well regarded.

对吧？

Right?

这让我想到理查德·费曼，他爸爸以前常跟他说，关键在于分清什么叫真正懂，什么叫只是会说个词儿——我这算是转述，但意思差不多：知道一个词儿，和明白这个词背后真正代表的东西，完全是两码事。

And this makes me think of Richard Feynman and how his dad used to tell him that there's a big difference, and I'm paraphrasing here, but between knowing the label, the word or the phrase, and understanding what that label is intended to represent.

通过观察自己用的语言，你能学到很多关于别人，也关于你自己和你思维方式的东西。

And you can learn so much about not only others, but yourself and your own thinking by looking at the language that you use.

我之前想问你一个问题，因为你参加《导师部落》的时候提到过：你是怎么提升自己的思考能力的？我记得特别清楚的一点是，你说到自己在‘最值得的投资’这件事上，第一句话是：我把收入的很大一部分，花在了持续聘请教练和导师上。

And one of the questions I wanted to ask you, because it came up when you were in Tribe of Mentors, was how you improve your own thinking, and something that stuck out to me, and I'm gonna track it down here, and this was in response to what is one of the best or the most worthwhile investments you've ever made, and I'll skip around here, but the first line was I invested disproportionate amount of my income in paying for an ever growing collection of trainers and coaches.

你提到了几位，其中一位你说是你见过最擅长倾听的人。

And you mentioned a handful, and one of them you said is the most gifted listener I've ever encountered.

她能帮我发现那些藏在暗处的假设——那些不是我在掌控它们，反而是它们在束缚我的东西，还教我不断提出更高质量的问题。

She surfaces my hidden assumptions, the ones that hold me rather than me holding them and teaches me to ask better and better questions.

不管是她，还是其他人，他们是怎么帮你发现这些隐藏的假设的？

How does, whether it's this person specifically or others, help you to surface your hidden assumptions?

我觉得这一点，对几乎所有事情都至关重要。

This strikes me as so, so key to just about everything.

投资碰巧会放大这种后果

Investing just happens to sort of magnify the consequences

在

in a

非常显而易见的方式上，也就是那些假设和错误的假设，但教练是怎么帮你把这些隐藏的假设挖掘出来的，或者说他们可能怎么做呢？

very often obvious way of assumptions and faulty assumptions, but how would a coach help you to surface your hidden assumptions, or how might they?

这位女士，卡罗琳·考夫林，特别属于鲍勃·基根那一派的。他是哈佛大学的教授，他有一个关于成人发展的理论，认为走向成年的过程，就是提高心智复杂度的过程，也是把那些曾经构成你、让你受其支配却看不见的假设，逐渐变成你能客观审视的对象的过程。

This woman, Caroline Coughlin, in particular, is within this Bob Keegan School of he's a professor at Harvard, and he has a theory about adult development, which is that the process of moving to adulthood is one of increasing your mental complexity and increasing the number of things that used to be you used to be subject to, assumptions you had you couldn't see, and making them object over time.

对很多人来说，一个例子就是：如果你是在宗教环境中长大的，你是主动选择了自己的宗教信仰，还是因为父母和社区里大家都浸淫在同样的信仰中，所以你自然而然地接受了这些信仰？

So an example for many people would be if they grew up in a religious context, are they actively choosing their religious beliefs, or did they arrive at them because their parents and community, everyone was swimming in those beliefs together?

我觉得，一个好的教练可以通过倾听，观察我是如何理解某件事的，然后指出：哦，你其实是在假设X。

And so what I feel like a really good coach can do is by listening the way I'm making sense of something can observe, oh, you're actually assuming x.

我把它比作一种“掌控感”。

I think of it as grip.

你对某些事物的掌控感其实非常强。

Your grip on certain things is really tight.

如果教练能发现你紧紧抓住的那些东西，而你甚至说不清相反的观点，那可能说明你的身份或自我已经和这些信念绑在一起了。

And if a coach can find what you're gripping really tightly and that you're actually not you can't articulate the opposite of this belief you have, That might be a sign that you have identity or ego caught up in that thing.

你能想出一个例子吗？

Can you think of an example?

最近我的商业伙伴指出，我似乎有一个很强的假设，他称之为‘未来主义’——我总期待事物被颠覆，对颠覆特别敏感，他观察到我对这些事抓得太紧了。

So one assumption my business partner pointed out to me recently that I seem to have, that I might be holding a little bit strongly is what he was calling futurism, that I'm ready for things to be disrupted and paranoid about disruption in this way that he observed is I'm holding I got a little bit too tight of a grip around things.

比如我们投资了一家酒店，那里可能存在气候变化的风险。

So we're investing in a hotel where there might be risks around climate change.

我会特别关注气候变化的问题。

I'm extra focused on the climate change.

如果我们投资的是一个价值投资者，他经常持有硅谷想颠覆的公司，我伙伴注意到，我会格外关注这方面的风险。

Or if we're investing in somebody, a value investor who's often going long things that Silicon Valley is trying to disrupt, my partner's observation is I will be extra focused on risks around that.

我觉得他说得完全对。

And I think he's totally right.

他一说，我立刻就明白了，原来如此。

Once he said that, it kinda clicked and I realized, okay.

但这并不意味着我就完全放下了。

Now that doesn't mean I drop it.

只是当它出现的时候，我能更客观地看待它了。

It just means when it comes up, it's more object to me.

对。

Mhmm.

在这种情况下，你会像你之前说的那样，试着去表达相反的观点吗？

And in a case like that, would you practice articulating the opposite as you mentioned earlier?

我正在消化你刚才说的，突然想到，你读过的书实在太多了。

And I'm just as my mind is digesting this right now, I'm thinking of you've read so many books.

简直让人难以想象。

It just boggles the mind.

你可能熟悉拜伦·凯蒂，她有个叫‘功课’的方法，不过你得小心，别把它当成唯一工具，不然就会到处找钉子好敲。但这个方法的一部分，就是把让你感到痛苦、焦虑或压力的信念，找出来——我不是说这个就是例子——然后去认真地陈述它的反面。

It wouldn't surprise me if you're familiar with Byron Katie, but she has something called the work, which I you have to be careful with using it as your only hammer because then you just start looking for nails everywhere, but part of that practice is taking this belief that is causing you, and I'm not saying this is an example here, but causing you some amount of discomfort or stress or anxiety, and then going through the exercise of stating the exact opposite.

对吧？

Right?

所以我爸的情况并不是真实例子。

So my dad should be this is not a real example.

我只是在编一个。

I'm making it up.

比如，我爸爸应该多关心一下我妈妈。

Like, my dad should be more attentive to my mom.

然后你会用几种不同的方式来表达，比如说，我爸爸应该少关心我妈妈。

And then you state it in a number of different ways, like, my dad should be less attentive to my mom.

我妈妈应该多关心我爸爸，诸如此类。

My mom should be more attentive to my dad, etcetera.

作为练习的一部分，你得去找一些实际依据，哪怕是最微小的证据，来支持这些相反的说法，这样能帮你把情绪和执着从最初的信念中剥离出来。

And you you have to, as part of the exercise, look for data points or even the smallest shred of evidence that you could put down if you were trying to make those arguments, and it helps to disentangle emotion and attachment from your initial kind of statement.

当你的伴侣指出你紧紧抓着的某种想法时，接下来该怎么做？光是指出来就够了吗？

When your partner brings to light something that you might be gripping tightly like this, what are the next steps after that, or is just the pointing out enough?

这就像是在看一个视觉错觉，你突然发现，哦，原来从这个角度看，那根本不是沙漏，而是一个老妇人的脸，从此以后，你再怎么看都再也无法忽略那个老妇人的形象了。

It's kinda like looking at an optical illusion, and you're like, oh, you see how if you look at it this way, it's actually an old woman's face instead of an hourglass, and you can never again look at that and not see the old woman's face.

我参加过好几次拜伦·凯蒂的工作坊。

The Byron Katie I've been to multiple workshops of her.

我觉得她太棒了。

I think she's amazing.

我就知道。

I knew it.

我就知道。

I knew it.

在这条街对面有个沙拉店，叫Sweet Greens，大概三个月前我去过那儿，正在听拜伦·凯蒂的新书《心灵与自己同在》。

I so across the street here, there's a salad place, sweet greens, and I was in there maybe three months ago listening to Byron Katie's new book, A Mind at Home With Itself.

结果拜伦·凯蒂和她丈夫史蒂文·米切尔走进店里，点了沙拉，然后就坐在我旁边。

And Byron Katie and her husband, Steven Mitchell, walk into the restaurant, order salads, and then proceed to sit right next to me.

这简直太不可思议了。

And it was the most unbelievable.

我拍了张照片，怕自己是不是幻觉了。

I took a picture of it because I thought I might be tripping.

后来你再看电脑屏幕，发现他们已经不在了。

And then you looked at your computer later, and no one was there.

我跟你说，他们吃那顿饭的样子，是我见过最有觉知的一餐。

And I will tell you, they proceeded to have the most mindful meal I think I may have ever witnessed.

有些导师，脱离了具体情境看，你可能会觉得他们言行不一。

There are some gurus who, out of context, you think, you know, are not walking their talk.

但这次，我可以肯定地说，她台上的样子和她本人完全一致。

In this particular case, I have I can affirm that she is like her stage presence.

你看过她在台上演讲吧？是的。

You've seen her on stage Yep.

一直都在看。

All the time.

对。

Yep.

所以我对她的可信度特别高。

So I find her credibility on that extra high.

是的。

Yeah.

我觉得她一直在问，这个信念到底是什么？

I think her thing of what's the belief?

这真的对吗？

Is it true?

相反的情况是什么？

What's the opposite of that?

你能确定它绝对是真的吗？

Can you absolutely know it's true?

当你有这个想法的时候，你感觉怎么样？

How do you feel when you think that thing?

对。

Yeah.

如果没有这个信念，你会是什么样子？

What would what would you be without this belief?

我觉得这真的特别有力量。

I think it's so powerful.

另外，不好意思打断一下。

And also, sorry to interrupt.

不过有一件事让我印象深刻，因为我几个月前和她有过一些接触，我可以证实你刚才说的。

But one thing that really caught me because I spent a little bit of time with her a number of months ago, and I can sort of confirm what you just said.

她完全就像你从书里期待的那样，甚至更好。

She is exactly what you would sort of expect and hope her to be based on the books.

我的意思是，如果你往形而上学的方向深究，确实会让人脑子转不过来，但关键在于用‘标签’和‘信念’这样的词来框架问题。

I mean, the metaphysics can get pretty mind bendy if you go in that direction, but the framing of using the word, we're talking about labels, belief.

比如，与其说‘想法’，不如问‘如果没有这个信念，你会是谁’，这一点特别重要。

Like, what would you be without this belief as opposed to thought is also really key.

是的。

Yeah.

对吧？

Right?

这就像你拿来当真的一句话。

It's like something you take it's a statement you take to be true.

对吧？

Right?

但要是这么来看，它就换了个角度。

And it's just framing it that way puts it under a different lens.

不过

But

说到你的问题，我觉得我确实有点把自己当成特立独行、热衷科技颠覆的人，总觉得现状不会一直持续下去。

So to your question, I think I may have a little bit of ego identity around being unconventional or being into technology disruption and not thinking that the status quo is gonna continue.

所以我的合伙人提醒我，要留意这一点。

And so what my business partner is pointing out is just watch that.

现在既然已经提出来了，我们在评估投资时就会意识到：我不该因为怕显得多疑就不提，毕竟这种视角其实很有帮助。

And now that we have it on the table, when we're evaluating investment, it's, oh, I don't want to be self conscious about bringing up the paranoia because I think it's a useful lens to have.

但能意识到自己多少有点被这种心态影响，真的很有用。

But being aware that I'm just a tiny bit subject to that is really useful.

那是2004年左右的事了，我在一家咖啡馆有人过来跟我打招呼，说‘你好啊，老兄’，还自我介绍了一下。

Back in the day, this was 2,004 maybe, I had someone approach me at a coffee shop and said, good day, mate, and introduce himself.

那人是谁？

Who was that?

你可能想不到，他居然是AG1的创始人，那时候刚起步呢。

It turned out to be founder of AG1, Believe it or not, way back in the day.

很多人问我，你试过那么多补品，最后剩下的是哪些？

And people often ask me what has survived after 20 of testing every supplement under the sun?

几乎全都不用了。

Just about.

真正一直留下来的，有哪些？

What actually has stayed in the rotation, in the toolbox?

这次的赞助商AG1，就在这份极短的清单顶端。

This episode sponsor AG1 is at the top of that very, very short list.

我差不多十五年前就开始用了，那时候它还叫Athletic Greens。

I started using it close to fifteen years ago when it was still called Athletic Greens.

我把它写进了《四小时身体》里，没拿过一分钱推广费，但它比我试过的几乎所有东西都更持久。

I put it in the four hour body, didn't get paid to put it in there, and it's outlasted almost everything else that I've tried.

一勺就能补全你日常所需的营养基础。

One scoop covers your nutritional bases.

对吧？

Right?

填补那些日常饮食的缺口。

Fills the gaps.

当然，你得吃好饭，但这里有75种以上的成分，包括益生菌、B族维生素和天然食物营养素，在我看来，这简直是超值的营养保障。

You wanna eat good food, of course, but 75 plus ingredients, including probiotics, b vitamins, and whole food nutrients act as, in my opinion, pretty cheap nutritional insurance.

我每天早上第一件事就是用冷水冲服。

I take it first thing every morning with cold water.

现在这已经成了习惯，就跟刷牙一样自然。

And at this point, it's automatic like brushing my teeth.

如果你想找一个简单又有效的日常习惯，来支持肠道健康、弥补常见营养不足，那我就从这儿开始。

If you're looking for one simple daily habit that supports gut health and fills common nutrient gaps, this is where I'd start.

所以去了解一下吧。

So check them out.

现在就订阅，体验AG1的下一代产品。

Subscribe today to try the next gen of AG one.

听众首次下单还能免费获得一瓶D3K2、AG1欢迎礼包和旅行装。

Listeners will also get a free bottle of d three k two and AG one welcome kit and AG one travel packs with your first order.

从AG1的下一代产品开始你的改变，亲身体验其中的不同。

So start your journey with AG1's next gen and experience the difference firsthand.

直接访问 drinkag1.com/tim 就行。

Simply go to drinkag1.com/tim.

就是 drinkag1.com/tim。

That's drinkag1.com/tim.

如果你在考虑一个团队，不管是现在我们所在的这些办公室里的团队，还是任何其他团队，其实都一样。

And if you're looking at a team, whether that's within these offices, you know, we're sitting in your offices right now, or could be any team, really.

不过，为了继续聚焦在你的投资优势上，你是怎么决定该培训每个人来克服这种偏见，而不是直接招新人来提供不同视角的？

But specifically, I I guess just to keep us in your power zone investing, when do you choose to teach each individual person to offset biases like this versus hiring another person to provide a counterpoint?

我问这个问题，其实有点超纲了，但你看巴菲特和芒格，巴菲特找的是便宜货，想低价买入，而芒格——我敢说网上肯定有人骂我，但他其实一直在慢慢告诉巴菲特，有些时候，即使价格没打折，只要增长前景足够好，也值得买，他们俩的配合简直天衣无缝。

And the reason I ask is and I'm getting way above my pay grade here, but if you look at, say, Buffett and Munger, and Buffett's searching for bargains and wants to sort of buy at a discount, and then Munger is I'm gonna get slaughtered on the Internet, I'm sure, but is sort of teaching him over time that there are cases where you can buy at market value or a fair price if the growth trajectory is really high, and they seem to complement each other very, very well.

你是怎么看待让每个人自己培养反向思维能力，而不是直接招人来达成这种最佳平衡的呢？

How do you think about each person developing the counterpoint or ability to look at the opposite versus hiring to end up at that optimal mixture?

对。

Yeah.

这又回到抓手的问题了。

Well, it's back to grip.

所以当我评估一个团队时，我会试着把看好特斯拉的人和看空特斯拉的人配在一起。

So when if I'm evaluating a team, I'm trying to figure out so sometimes I'll I'll hook up someone who is long Tesla with someone who is short Tesla.

当你观察他们的讨论时，就能看出来，看好和看空的双方，是在主动寻找反面证据，还是只是在固守自己的立场？

And when you're witnessing that exchange, you can see whether the person who's long Tesla and the person who's short Tesla, are they actively seeking disconfirming evidence, or is it an ideological thing?

特斯拉是个有点极端的例子，因为两边都太情绪化了。

And Tesla is a little bit of an extreme example because it's very ideological on both sides.

正因为太极端，其实不太适合作为典型，但正因如此，反而更容易看清楚——现在在推特上，空头和马斯克的支持者正来回交锋。

It's not really a great example for that reason, but you can see it because it's more extreme that right now on Twitter, the shorts are and Musk and the people who are long are going back and forth.

大多数人其实并不真想理解对方的观点。

The vast majority of them are not actually looking to hold the other person's perspective.

在团队里，你能看出来有没有人已经做到了这一点。

In a team context, you can witness whether there's somebody who's already there.

对冲基金和私募行业有个有意思的地方，就是公司之间的界限其实很模糊。

In the hedge fund industry and the private equity industry, what's cool is that the boundary of the firm is pretty fluid.

有时候，一个基金的投资经理会和另外一到五个投资经理关系很紧密。

So sometimes a portfolio manager of one firm will have a close relationship with one to five other portfolio managers.

你能先解释一下PM是什么意思吗？

Can you define here just for folks so PM.

对吧？

Right?

投资经理。

Portfolio manager.

投资经理。

Portfolio manager.

那个人是谁？

Who is that person?

就是那个负责管理投资公司、做投资决策并确定投资组合中各项目规模的人。

That's the person who's running the investment firm and who's making the investment decisions and sizing the investments in that portfolio.

这是核心角色。

The main it's the main role.

对。

Mhmm.

我的意思是，在大公司里，可能会有多个，没错。

I mean, inside a large firm, might have multiple Yes.

PM，这取决于

PMs depending on

你说得对。

That's a good catch.

我本来想说的是首席投资官，但如果你有

I I meant more CIO, but if you had

首席投资官。

a Chief investment officer.

首席投资官。

Chief investment officer.

没错。

Exactly.

但在像城堡这样的大机构里，投资经理有时也需要对外建立联系，这些买方之间的观点常常会互相挑战，类似巴菲特那种思维碰撞的情况，往往也存在于不同公司之间。

But a portfolio manager within a large shop like Citadel will have external relationships sometime, and sometimes those buy side relationships will be testing each other's thinking, and the equivalent of that BuffettMonger thing often exists across firm.

所以这种互动并不局限于公司内部。

So they don't have to be within the boundary of the firm.

也就是说，他们在主动寻找反证。

So the the looking for disconfirming evidence Yeah.

我想再稍微多说一点。

I wanna stick with for a second.

这种做法你肯定能在任何优秀的科学家身上看到。

So this is something you see certainly in any good scientist.

他们并不是为了证明某个观点而开始的。

They're not setting out to prove x.

他们是先提出一个假设，然后尽可能客观、无偏见地去评估，虽然完全客观可能做不到，但会主动寻找是否存在或能否识别出反证。

They are coming up with a hypothesis and then hopefully in as unbiased and objective a way possible, arguably not possibly fully, fully objective, trying to then assess and actively look for disconfirming evidence if it exists or if they can isolate it.

那怎么才能训练自己更好地做到这一点呢？

How could one train themselves to get better at doing that?

甚至可能是一些看似间接的方法。

And it could be as seemingly indirect as you like.

我只是在想。

I'm just wondering.

我觉得第一步，应该是我们之前提到的，学会把你自己所有的假设或偏见当成一个独立的对象来看待，这样你才能意识到它们的存在。

I mean, it would seem like one step would be developing what we talked about earlier, this ability to take whatever assumption or bias you have and then view it as an object so that you're aware of it.

对吧？

Right?

冥想在这方面会有帮助。

And some meditation can help with that.

像拜伦·凯蒂的方法就能帮上忙。

Doing something like Byron Katie can help with that.

还有没有别的方法，不管是培养寻找反证的习惯之前，还是这个习惯本身，对你有帮助的？

Are there other things, whether they're precursors to looking for disconfirming evidence or that habit itself that helped to cultivate?

我觉得有一种深层的警觉感特别有用，就是担心自己漏掉了什么，顶尖的投资经理都有这种感觉。

Well, I think an underlying paranoia that you're missing something is really useful, and the best portfolio managers have that.

他们就是有种意识，也许你可以通过定期复盘自己犯过的错误来强化这种感觉，想想看：

They're they're just that sense that and maybe you dial it up by regularly reviewing all the mistakes you've made and think thinking, okay.

有时候我能看得很清楚，有时候却会错过关键点。

Some percentage of the time, I see things clearly, and some percentage of the time, I miss it.

你知道吗，在公开市场里，一个优秀投资经理的胜率大概在65%左右。

You know, one thing about financial markets in the publicly traded side is a really good portfolio manager's hit rate is like 65%.

这已经非常高了，很多时候55%的胜率就足够了，尤其是看他们的盈亏比怎么样。

Like, that's off the charts, and 55% will do just fine in a lot of cases depending particularly on their slugging percentage.

他们是怎么决定该押注多少，来平衡赢家和输家的？

How do they size the winners versus the losers?

赢家当然要下更大的注，输家就小一点。

You wanna size the winners, obviously, bigger than the losers.

所以关键是怎么在保持警觉的同时又不失去谦逊。

So there's something around how do you maintain paranoia and humility.

对冲基金行业有个难题，就是一旦你公开发表意见——比如写信、上CNBC，或者出现在公众视野里。

I think one tricky thing in the hedge fund space is being on the record in any way in the form of writing letters or being in on CNBC or being in the public domain.

这会让你更难果断放手，转而做空。

Probably on the margin makes it harder to drop it like a hot potato and go short.

在我看来，最厉害的基金经理，他们的身份认同不是‘我聪明，所以赚钱’，或者‘我擅长金融股’，而是‘我是个赚钱的人’。

And to me, the most skilled portfolio managers have an identity not as I am smart, and therefore I make money, or I am good at financial stocks, but the meta identity is I'm a moneymaker.

如果在这个时代、这个时刻，做多特斯拉能赚钱，那我就做多特斯拉。

And if that involves right now, if in this era, in this moment in history, that's going long Tesla, I'll go long Tesla.

如果做空特斯拉更合适，那我就做空特斯拉。

If I'll go short Tesla, I'll go short Tesla.

但心里不会有任何执念。

But there's no baggage.

我记得有一次走进去，见到一个我们跟他合作了大量资金的人，我非常非常敬重他。

I remember walking into a guy who we have a ton of money with who I really, really respected.

他当时做空了Solar City。

He was short Solar City.

就在马斯克宣布特斯拉要收购Solar City的那天早上。

And it was on the morning that Musk announced that Tesla was buying Solar City.

那天早上，所有做空这只股票的人都特别难受。

It was a very painful morning for people who were short the stock.

我本以为这家伙会垂头丧气，对马斯克气得不行，结果他居然在笑。

And I expected this guy to be moping around and super pissed at Musk, and he was laughing.

他反而在享受这种胆量。

He was enjoying the audacity.

他觉得自己完全融入了这个游戏，而我其实早有心理准备。

He feels like he's in this game, and I knew it was a possibility.

但我真没料到他会有这么大的魄力，敢这么干。

I didn't think he was gonna have the chutzpah to do that.

对吧？

Right?

就是这种心态，这种幽默感，这种轻松的态度，错了就错了，赶紧翻篇，继续下一轮。

Like, that mentality, that humor, that lightness, that, oh, got this one wrong, onto the next one.

如果这位投资经理曾在致投资者的信里提到过什么，虽然他实际上没提过，但假如他提了，我一点都不奇怪他下个月就反手做空这个标的。金融市场的妙处就在于多空双向，无论价格涨跌，都能赚钱。

If that particular portfolio manager ever wrote about something in the letter he doesn't happen to, but if he did, I would have no qualms that the following month, he can easily be short the position he just and so one nice thing about financial markets is that long short thing, the the ability to make money by it going up and make money by it going down.

你懂的？

You know?

而且随时可以调整仓位。

And change your position.

这让我想起乔什很久以前做的一项决定——至少现在可能变了，但我怀疑没变，毕竟以他目前的状况，我们就不细说了，他现在几乎不可能再做公开演讲了。

This reminds me of something Josh decided some time ago, which was that he wouldn't at least maybe this has changed, but I I doubt it has changed given his current circumstances, which we won't get into, but very unlikely he's giving many keynotes right now.

他不再做演讲，是因为觉得那样会固化自己的思维，让观点变得僵化。一旦在公开场合反复讲同样的观点，就很难再潜移默化或有意识地去调整它们了。

He stopped giving keynotes because he felt like it would entrench his thinking and calcify his positions because he would be he would be repeating these statements and concepts that he would then be less likely to subconsciously or consciously to modify.

是的。

Yeah.

我经常会问每个人这个问题，也许你之前听过，但你最常送人的是哪些书呢？

This is something I ask everyone, and maybe you've heard this before, but are there any particular books that you have gifted the most to other people?

它们不一定跟我们刚才聊的内容有关，但你读书量实在太大了。

They don't have to relate to what we've been discussing at all, but you are so widely read.

有没有哪几本是你经常推荐或送人的？

Do any stand out as books that you've gifted or recommended often to other people?

在金融领域，我特别喜欢一本比较冷门的书，叫《有抱负的投资者》，作者是阿什温·查布拉，他负责吉姆·西蒙的家庭办公室。

In financial markets, I really like this somewhat obscure book called the aspirational investor by this guy, Ashwin Chabra, who runs Jim Simon's family office.

吉姆·西蒙创办了文艺复兴科技公司，那是最顶尖的量化基金。

Jim Simon started Renaissance Technologies, which is the dominant quant fund.

这真是个了不起的故事。

Amazing story.

我们就不细说了，不过文艺复兴科技确实特别有意思。

We're not gonna get into it, but just, yeah, Renaissance is really fascinating.

你接着说。

Please continue.

我特别欣赏雷诺斯和吉姆·西蒙斯的一点是，纽约客那篇专访里提到，他认为自己真正擅长的是挑选有趣的问题。

And one thing I like about Renaissance and Jim Simons, has this line on a New Yorker profile of him that he thinks what he has is really good taste in interesting problems.

他用的词是‘品味’。

He uses the word taste.

他家族办公室的负责人以前负责过高等研究院的捐赠基金。

And this guy who runs his family office used to run the endowment at the Institute for Advanced Studies.

在这本书里，他指出了现代投资组合理论的缺陷，而这些理论几十年来一直主导着人们对投资的主流看法。

And in the book, he identifies what he sees as the flaws in modern portfolio theory, which have totally dominated prevailing beliefs about investing for decades.

阿什温提出了一种完全不同的投资组合构建方式，基于人们真实的行为和真正关心的东西。

And Ashwin suggests a totally different approach to portfolio construction based on how people actually behave and what they actually care about.

所以我经常把这本书送人。

And so that's a book I give out a lot.

还有一本讲的是公司创立过程中文化塑造的书。

There's on the culture side of somebody starting a firm.

我正盯着你的肩膀看呢，因为我书架上摆着好几本。

I'm looking over your shoulder because I've got a bunch of them on the bookshelf here.

《部落领导力》作者是戴夫·洛根。

Tribal Leadership by Dave Logan.

戴夫·洛根研究了成千上万个组织，把它们分成了几类。

Dave Logan has looked at thousands of organizations and puts them into categories.

前芝加哥公牛队教练菲尔·杰克逊说，洛根在《部落领导力》里提出的这个框架，是他见过的最能解释顶级团队运作方式的模型。

And Phil Jackson, the former coach of the Chicago Bulls, has observed that that framework that Logan discusses in trouble leadership is the best framework for understanding world class teams that he's come across.

如果你感兴趣，我们可以详细聊聊。

We can go into it if it's of interest.

《文化密码》这本书我经常推荐给别人，作者是丹尼尔·科伊尔。

Culture Code by Daniel Coyle, I give people.

你觉得这本书有什么特别有价值的地方？

What do you find of value in that book?

这书在播客里被提到过好多次了。

This book has come up a lot on the podcast.

但我一直还没来得及读。

I still have not read it.

这本书在很多不同的场合都被提到过。

It's come up in many different contexts.

这本书讲的是什么？

What is that book about?

他研究了各种不同的文化，比如皮克斯和海豹突击队。

He's looking at a bunch of different cultures, Pixar, Navy Seals.

他还分析了其他几个案例，大概三四个吧。

He's got three others or something.

他在寻找那些让团队特别高效的共同模式。

He's looking for patterns among what make people disproportionately effective as as a culture.

对。

Mhmm.

我觉得他抓住了一些关键的细节，如果你在组建团队，这些内容能让你更清楚地看到问题所在。

And I think he captures some of the nuance that if you're trying to set up teams, you it exposes you to that.

对。

Mhmm.

他来当播客嘉宾挺合适的。

He'd be a good guest on the podcast.

那本书我记在待读清单里了。

That's book on my homework list.

好的，记下了。

Check.

我也挺喜欢那些工具的。

I also like the tools.

我有时候会推荐给别人。

I give that out sometimes.

那是菲尔·斯塔茨和巴里·迈克尔斯写的。

That's by Phil Stutz and Barry Michaels.

你听说过他们吗？

Have you ever heard of them?

听说过。

I have.

他们是搞影视编剧的吗？

Are they screenwriters work in entertainment?

我在找这方面的信息吗？

Am I looking for that?

对。

Yeah.

他们是心理学家，住在好莱坞，给很多编剧做心理辅导。

They're they're psychologists, they're in Hollywood, and they treat a lot of screenwriters.

原来如此。

Oh, I see.

《纽约客》的记者达娜·古迪尔写过一篇关于他们的专访，后来他们就合著了这本书，叫《工具》。

And there's a New Yorker reporter Dana Goodyear did a profile of them that highlighted them, and then they wrote a book called the tools.

书里有不少特别实用的小技巧。

And they have a bunch of good hacks in there.

有几位拍纪录片的导演——我就不点名了——他们属于最顶尖的那一批，拍的纪录片票房特别好，都跟我推荐过这本书。

Some of the most I won't mention them by name, but a few of the documentary filmmakers who who are on a very short list of documentary filmmakers who create massively commercially successful documentaries have recommended this book to me.

这事儿最初就是这么冒出来的。

That's that's how it first came up.

举个例子，这跟温·霍夫的情况特别贴切。

Just as an example, it's very apropos of Wim Hof.

他们打了个比方，说想达成目标，就得先熬过一段痛苦。

They have this whole analogy of saying this model of to get to what you want, you have to go through some pain.

等等，你能给没听说过温·霍夫的人简单介绍一下他吗？

Oh, so just to pause, could you describe for people who Wim Hof as if they haven't?

温·霍夫嘛，我记得他第一次上播客访谈就是在这儿。

So, yeah, Wim Hof, first I think his first podcast interview was on this podcast.

这人挺有意思的。

Interesting guy.

不过到底谁是温·霍夫？

But who's Wim Hof?

温·霍夫发明了一套让自己接触寒冷的方法，现在通过你和莱尔德·汉密尔顿这些人推广，已经教了数百万人。

Wim Hof has developed a way of exposing himself to the cold and a and methodology around exposing himself to the cold that he now teaches to millions of people, thanks to you and Laird Hamilton and others highlighting him.

冰人

The Iceman.

对。

Yes.

有时候这称号有点争议，毕竟得小心别冻伤手指脚趾，但他确实有一套训练方法。

A dubious honor in some cases because you do need to watch your fingers and toes, but he he has a number of training approaches.

不过有时候也会让人怀疑，他那些本事到底是天赋多一点，还是训练出来的，尤其是在耐寒和屏气方面。

Although one sometimes wonders how much of what he can do is attribute versus training, but for cold exposure and also for breath holding.

我不打算跑题，但关于屏气，得提一句。

I don't wanna take us off the rails, but quick note on breath holding.

我们共同的朋友乔什，曾经在这儿的泳池里做屏气训练，差点因浅水昏迷丧命，千万别在水里练。

Our mutual friend, Josh, almost died from a shallow water blackout in a pool here doing breath hold training, never do it in water.

真没什么必要冒这个险。

There's really no good reason.

这些人用了一个比喻，其实是在教你如何调整内心对话，他们说，当你预感到要面对痛苦时，就搓搓手，对自己说：来吧，我准备好了。

So these guys have this metaphor of they're basically coaching you on your self talk, and they're they say you should rub your hands together and say, bring it on when you're anticipating doing something that is gonna be painful.

他们用跳进海边冷水中作比喻，说这种主动拥抱不适的能力，正是魏茨金所推崇的，他称之为‘痛苦的另一面’——就是要经常让自己直面痛苦，直到不再一碰就退缩。

And they use the metaphor of going into the cold water at the beach and that regular embracing of discomfort is a skill that Weitzkin is also into and a theme of, like, learning to he calls it Weitzkin calls it the other side of pain, but getting used to exposing yourself to pain on a regular basis to the point where you don't bounce off of it.

对。

Yeah.

斯塔茨和迈克尔斯在与好莱坞的制片人、经纪人、编剧等人合作时发现，很多人都在逃避自己该做的事。

Stutz and Michaels observed that in their work with producers, agents, screenwriters, etcetera, Hollywood that people were avoiding doing the thing they needed to do.

他们一遇到就退缩。

They were bouncing off of it.

所以如果你能培养一种技能和机制，逼自己去面对，养成习惯，他们就总结出了六种方法。

And so if you can create a skill and a mechanism to make yourself go into it and get in that habit and they they've got, like, six of them.

我也会用这套方法教孩子。

And so I do this with my kids.

我们会真的搓搓手，心里默念：好了。

Like, we'll literally rub our hands together and be thinking, okay.

来吧，迎接挑战。

Bring it on to x.

所以我很好奇，Josh 是不是从你这儿学到的。

So I wonder if Josh got this from you.

说实话，你们俩各自想到这个点子我也不觉得奇怪。他和儿子一起洗冷水澡，每次都跟儿子说，这感觉真棒，还教他用短时间的冰水澡时也说‘真棒’，不过我猜那孩子可能只是在编，当时才四岁。

I mean, it wouldn't surprise me if you guys independently arrived at this, but with his son, he would take cold showers, and he would always say, it's so good, and he taught his son to say, it's so good with these short, freezing cold showers, and I don't know, his son was probably making this up, four years old at the time.

是的。

Yeah.

他还教儿子享受那些别人觉得糟糕的天气。

And also taught his son to enjoy going out in what other people would consider bad weather.

没错。

Right.

对吧？

Right?

比如下雨天之类的。

The rainstorms and so on.

是的。

Yeah.

所以这就是一个例子，对吧，主动把下雨变成你自己的事。

So that's an example, right, of just making yourself making the rain object.

我觉得乔什观察到的是，对大多数人来说，他们被动地受天气影响，觉得天气是在对他们施加作用。

So I think what Josh is observing is that for most people, they are subject to the weather, and they're experiencing the weather as acting on them.

没错。

Right.

而破解这一点的方法就是干脆说：不。

And a hack around that is to say basically, no.

我喜欢下雨。

I enjoy the rain.

我会去找其中让我享受的部分，不让它变成外界强加给我的事，而是把掌控感收回到自己手里。

I'm gonna find what I enjoy in it and make it not the world happening to me, but bring the locus of control internally

这就是

is what

我觉得他正在做的。

I think he's doing there.

是啊。

Oh, yeah.

挺不错的育儿技巧。

A good parenting hacks.

如果我身后还有其他书，欢迎提出来。

If there are more books behind me, then feel free to to mention them.

我喜欢《有限与无限的游戏》，这本书最近挺火的。

I like finite and infinite games, which has been going around a lot.

他另一本书叫《胜利的早餐》。

His other book, breakfast at the victory

这是詹姆斯·卡斯。

This is James Carse.

詹姆斯·卡斯真的很棒。

James Carse is really good.

几年前我们办过一场对冲基金闭门会，专门请过他，还聊了一段时间。

I had him to an event, a hedge fund retreat we had a couple years ago and spent some time with him.

我觉得他真是个特别有深度的人。

And he's I think he's a very profound guy.

他提到，我问他怎么想到‘有限游戏’和‘无限游戏’这个概念的，他说他观察自己孩子玩游戏时发现，有些游戏比如纸牌或棒球，孩子们的动机就是赢、结束游戏、拿奖杯。

He was observing that I asked him how he came up with the concept of finite versus infinite games, and he said he was watching his kids play, and he noticed that there were some games like card games or baseball, etcetera, where their whole motivation and intent was to have the game end and get the trophy.

但他也注意到，孩子玩另一些游戏时，比如幻想类游戏，他们的目标是拉别人一起玩，比如拉上他这个爸爸，关键是让游戏一直持续下去。

And then he noticed there were other games they were playing where there were more fantasy games where their goal was to recruit other people to play in that game with them, such as him as their dad, and the goal was to keep the game going as long as possible.

我觉得这个洞察太深刻了——如果你能看清自己正在玩的是哪种游戏，就能理解人与游戏之间不同的关系。

I think it's a super profound insight of the different ways you can relate to games in your life if you can see the game you're playing.

我问他有没有无限游戏的例子，但书里他没举。

And I asked him for examples of infinite games, which he doesn't give in the book.

作为宗教研究学者，他认为佛教和犹太教就是两种无限游戏。

He mentioned, as a religious studies scholar, he thinks Buddhism and Judaism are two infinite games.

在宗教研究里，这两种信仰都没有一个中央权威或中央军队。

I guess in religious studies, neither of those has a central authority or a central army.

所以它们跟天主教不一样，人们反而很难理解它们为什么能持续这么久。

So it's unlike Catholicism, they have difficulty making sense of why it persists over time.

所以，从无限游戏的角度来看，佛教徒和犹太人会以不同程度地吸引他人加入他们的游戏，纯粹为了游戏本身而持续下去。

And so the framework of it's an infinite game, those people, Buddhists and and Jews, are recruiting, to various degrees, people into their game and wanting to just keep playing the game for its own sake.

这种说法挺有意思的。

That that was an interesting framing.

有限游戏和无限游戏的这种区别，怎么应用到金融领域呢？

How does this the distinction of finite and infinite games apply to finance?

也许并不适用。

If it does.

不，不适用。

No.

我觉得还是适用的。

It I think it does.

比如，一个做有限游戏的基金经理，可能会追求达到某个净资产目标，然后就退出这个游戏。

I mean, a finite player who's an investment manager would be, for instance, trying to hit a certain number of net worth and then leave the game.

对吧？

Right?

这也没问题，但从我的角度看，这样的合作伙伴价值就低了。一旦他们达成了目标财富并真的停手，激励机制就会变得有点奇怪。

And that's okay, but that makes it less valuable of a partner from my perspective, and the incentives can get kinda weird once they achieve that net worth if they actually stick to it.

但现实是，大多数人会不断调整目标。

Now the reality is most people move the bar.

有一项研究显示，无论收入水平如何，每个人都希望自己拥有当前收入的两倍。

There is a study which shows that everybody wants to have all along the income spectrum, everybody wants to have two times where they are right now.

不过总的来说，我更倾向于找那些以无限游戏心态做事的合作伙伴——他们享受过程本身，愿意持续参与，还想拉别人进来。这又回到了商业思维和交易思维的区别。

And but I think there are in general, I seek out partners who are playing high experience as infinite players who are enjoying the game for its own sake and are gonna keep playing and wanna recruit other people in that's back to the distinction between being commercial and transactional.

真正有商业思维的人，追求的是创造比自己获取更多的价值，这种心态会为他人留出空间。

There's something about the abundance mentality behind somebody who's commercial who's trying to create more value than they capture that's like leaving room for other people

是的。

Yeah.

就是这样。

In this way.

你怎么判断一个人是不是这样的呢？

How do you test for that?

如果这是评估人才时相对靠后的需求，但你确实想考察这一点，那该怎么去评估呢？

If that is, it might be lower on the hierarchy of needs in assessing talent, but if it is something that you try to assess, how do you assess it?

最关键的是时间视野。

The big one is time horizon.

如果一个人心里想着，嗯。

If there are somebody who's thinking, okay.

我找到了一件我真正热爱的事。

I found this thing that I love to do.

我打算接下来二十年都做它，不会因为市场变化、有限合伙人或团队的压力就临时调整方向。

I'm gonna do it for the next twenty years, and I'm not gonna make short term accommodations to what's going on in the market or with my limited partners or with my team.

我是通过时间视野来判断的。

I experience it around time horizon.

你会怎么问这个问题呢？

How do you ask around the question?

尤其是这个播客发布之后，你可能会想，好吧。

Especially after this podcast comes out, you're gonna be like, okay.

格雷厄姆看重长期视角。

Graham wants long time horizons.

你从他们经营企业的方式就能看出来。

You could see it just in the way they're setting up their business.

有些人创办投资公司，只是因为到了职业生涯这个阶段，朋友们都开始搞投资公司了，这背后其实藏着一些微妙的心理倾向。

There are indications of just subtle mental framings on some people start investment firms because it's the time of their career where they've kind of their friends have started investment firms.

他们觉得待在原来的位置上已经不行了，必须得另起炉灶。

They can no longer stay at the container they're in, and they need to start.

但这并不是一个主动追求的目标。

But it's not an approach goal.

更像是一种逃避型的选择。

It's almost an avoidant goal.

就是说，嗯。

It's like, okay.

到了这个年纪，就该做这件事了。

This is the time where I'm supposed to do this.

我就是要这么做。

I'm gonna do this.

而另一些人则是这样想：好吧。

Versus a different set that are like, okay.

我找到了真正喜欢的事。

I found the thing I love.

我找到了自己爱打的球，现在要用新的方式去打。

I I found the ball I like to hit, and I'm gonna do it in this new form.

这让我觉得，他们的视野更长远——虽然老生常谈，但确实是发自内心热爱这项事业本身。

That implies to me a longer time horizon, and I it's a cliche, but a love of the game itself.

就算现在把大卫·泰珀的钱全拿走，让他从零开始，我猜他还是会乐在其中。

If you took away David Tepper's money and made him start at scratch right now, I think he'd enjoy it.

因为他就是找到了自己真正热爱的事。

Like, he's just found the thing he loves.

还有谁是长期主义者？乔科·威尔金克就是。

And who else has long term Jocko Willink.

我觉得我会投资乔科做的任何事情。

I think I would invest in something Jocko did.

我觉得他恰恰就是这样，他的座右铭就是积极主动。

I think he has that exact in fact, his mantra, right, is default aggressive.

他身上有一种既果断又正直，同时兼具谦逊的特质。

He has that mix of aggressive integrity or aggressive and humility.

你想想，他刚从伊拉克回来。

And you think of it, he's coming back from Iraq.

他先做CLT训练，然后就走进了你的世界。

He does CLT, and then he's entering your world.

他说，哦，这个是播客吗？

And he said, oh, this is this podcast thing.

然后呢，哦，还有教练这一块。

And then, you know, oh, coaching thing.

但我其实并不认识他。

And and I don't know him.

我真的很佩服他做自己的事的方式。

I just really admire the way he's doing his own thing.

他既有长远的眼光，又能把想法付诸行动。

He has that mix of time horizon, having an idea, executing on it.

你们俩应该认识一下。

You guys should know each other.

我来给你们介绍一下。

I'll introduce you guys.

你们一定会合得来。

You you would get along.

我想再围绕这个问题多聊一会儿，别直接问得太尖锐。

I wanna stay with this for a little bit more in terms of sniffing around the direct question.

说说2008年发生了什么吧。

Tell me about what happened in 2008.

你也可以换个角度，看看政客们过去是怎么投票的，而不是问他们将来会怎么做。

You can maybe also along the lines of looking at how politicians have voted on things as opposed to asking them what they will do.

是的

Yeah.

这让我想到，从时间视野、内在动机与外在动机这些角度出发，你也可以像Y Combinator过去常做的那样，去问他们业余时间都做了些什么、开发过什么项目——虽然这不是对问题的直接回答，但能反映出一种行为模式和动机倾向。

It it just made me think that looking at time horizon and sort of intrinsic versus extrinsic motivations and so on, you could you could also assess kind of along the same lines that Y Combinator has at least historically by asking a lot of questions around what they've built in their spare time and things like that, which will not be a direct answer to the question but could act as indicators that point to sort of a general pattern of behavior and motivations.

从我的角度看，Y Combinator、保罗·格雷厄姆和萨姆·阿尔特曼的东西都特别有参考价值。

I find Y Combinators and Paul Grahams and Sam Altman stuff high signal from my perspective.

他们通常会问自己一个问题：

So, like, they have this question to ask themselves.

你能看着这个人说他是个‘动物’，却还笑得出来吗？

Can you say this person is an animal and not smile?

根据你对他的了解，根据你和他之前的互动。

You know, based on the references, based on your interactions with them.

我觉得他们关注的，正是我和我所看重的那种冲劲和强烈程度。

I think they're keying in on the same quality of aggression or intensity that I am.

巴菲特看重的是热情和常识。

Buffett uses passion and common sense.

Redalia 强调果断和开放心态，但我感觉大家其实都在关注我之前提到的那个矛盾点。

Redalia uses assertiveness and open mindedness, but I think everybody's honing in on this paradoxical tension that I was talking about earlier.

不好意思。

Sorry.

你刚才问的是什么来着？

What was tell me the question again.

哦，对。

Oh, yeah.

不是。

No.

我都不确定我是不是真问了那个问题。

That that I'm not even sure I asked the question.

我觉得那更像是一种观察，我在想有没有别的办法，绕开直接问时间视野这个问题——当然你已经举了好几个例子了，我觉得答案其实已经有了。

I think it was more of an observation and wondering if there are other ways to sort of ask around the direct question of time horizon, which, I mean, you already gave a few examples of, so I think it's been answered.

咱们接着聊一下你顺口提到的另一点吧，我来念一段话帮大家回忆一下，不过我可能会把名字念错。

So let's pick up on one thing you also mentioned in passing, which I'll refresh for people listening by reading a quote, and I'm gonna get this name wrong.

所以，这其实是你介绍给我的一句话。

So maybe you could this is a quote that you introduced me to.

当时有两句候选的话，是关于如果你能竖一块超大广告牌，上面会写什么——当然，这是比喻的说法。

It was one of two candidates for answering the question what you would put on a gigantic billboard, and, you could put anything on it, metaphorically speaking.

对吧？

Right?

就是一条能传达到数百万甚至数十亿人那里的信息。

A message to get out to millions or billions of people.

你能念一下这句话吗？

So could you read this?

这句话一直在我脑子里挥之不去，我反复想过很多次，但我不太确定该怎么读才对。

It is stuck in my mind, and I've revisited it so many times, but I don't know the proper pronunciation.

是纽约大学的哲学家夸梅·阿皮亚，我记得他以前在普林斯顿大学任教，他说过这句话。

Kwame Apia, who's a philosopher at NYU, actually, I think he used to be at Princeton, has this quote.

不是你把游戏玩得多好。

It's not how well you play the game.

关键是你要决定玩哪一种游戏。

It's deciding what game you wanna play.

没错。

Right.

你之前提到过这个游戏，如果你意识到自己正在玩这个游戏的话。

And so you had mentioned the game, if you're aware that you're playing the game.

这个观点对你来说有什么意义或重要性呢？

What is the relevance or importance of this quote for you?

我再念一遍。

And I'll read it one more time.

所以，重要的不是你把游戏玩得多好。

So it's not how well you play the game.

而是你决定要去玩哪一种游戏。

It's deciding what game you want to play.

我觉得这句话的意思是，让你从被动接受游戏转变为主动掌控游戏。

Oh, I think that's a way of making your game, moving it from being subject to it to object.

举个例子，我觉得很多人显然在玩赚钱这个游戏，他们用赚了多少钱、获得了多少名气或权力来计分，把这个游戏当成外在目标，而他这句话的核心，大概就是提醒你要想清楚：你是否还愿意继续玩这个游戏。

So an example would be, I think a a huge number of people are obviously playing the game of making money, and they're keeping score in terms of how much money they make or how much fame they accumulate or how much power they accumulate And making that game object to them and then making sure that you still want to play that game is I think what his quote is about.

我后来写了一篇博文，试着梳理投资管理中不同阶段的精通过程，就发布在我的网站上。

Ended up writing an essay where I tried to capture the various stages of mastery and investment management that's on blog, that's on my site.

对我来说，这句话能让你跳出来，换个角度想：好吧。

And to me, that quote allows you to kind of zoom out and say, okay.

在我人生的不同时期，我会选择玩不同的游戏。

At different stages of my life, I'm gonna play different games.

我现在正在玩的是什么游戏？

What game am I playing right now?

我能看清它吗？

And can I see it?

其实，这正是我过去找过的教练帮我去做的事——他们让我明白：

In effect, that's what the coaches and the coach I've used in the past helps you do is say, okay.

你现在明显是在为这个目标全力以赴。

You're clearly optimizing right now for this.

关键是确保你真的想玩这个游戏。

Just make sure you actually want that that's the game you want.

想玩的话。

Wanna play.

你爬的梯子，靠的是一面对的墙。

The ladder you're climbing is leaning against the right wall.

咱们得确认一下，是的。

Let's just make sure Yeah.

时不时检查一下。

Check it every once in a while.

没错。

Yeah.

这就像是在玩电子游戏时，获得了上帝视角。

So you could kinda allows you to kinda in a video game, it's the god's eye view.

上帝视角。

God's eye view.

对。

Right.

上帝视角看游戏。

God's eye view of the game.

你就想，好吧。

You're like, okay.

我在这片山脉的角落里。

I'm down here in this corner of the mountain range.

我还要继续爬这座山吗？还是说这只是个局部高峰，其实该拉远视角，换个方向走？

Do I still wanna climb this mountain, or is that a local maximum, and I should actually zoom out and head a completely different direction?

我觉得你之前

I think you've

跟我提过这个。

mentioned this to me before.

可能在《部落导师》里也说过，但这让我想到大卫·福斯特·华莱士的毕业演讲，那个演讲被出过书，网上也有各种版本。

It may even be in tribal mentors, but it it makes me think of the David Foster Wallace commencement speech, which has been turned into books and is online in various forms.

但没错，就在这儿。

But, yes, here it is right here.

这就是水。

This is water.

是的。

Yeah.

这个故事讲的是什么？

The story of what is it?

两条小鱼游过一条老鱼，老鱼没打招呼。

The two young fish together swimming by the old the old fish, and the old fish doesn't pass.

我就想，小子们，水怎么样啊？类似这样的话。

I'm like, how's the water boys or something like that.

他们却问：水是什么？

They're like, what's water?

水是什么？

What's water?