章节 01：幸福与成功的辩证关系

📝 本节摘要：

在本章中，Naval Ravikant 提出了一个核心悖论：幸福源于对现状的满足，而成功往往源于不满。他通过苏格拉底和第欧根尼的历史典故，阐述了“不想要”与“拥有”具有同等的自由度。他反驳了“痛苦是成功的必要条件”这一观点，认为通过减少内心的愤怒与情绪内耗，人可以在保持高效的同时获得内心的平静。最终，他指出赢得这场人生游戏的真正目的，是为了从游戏中解脱出来，不再受其束缚。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: happiness is being satisfied with what you have Success comes from dissatisfaction Is success worth it then oof I'm not sure that statement is true anymore Like I made that statement a long time ago and a lot of these things are just notes to myself and they're highly contextual They come in the moment they leave in the moment

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 幸福是对你所拥有的一切感到满足，而成功则源于不满。那么成功值得吗？呃，我不确定这句话是否还正确了。这是我很久以前说的，这些话很多只是我给自己的笔记，它们高度依赖于语境。它们随那一刻而来，也随那一刻而去。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Happiness Okay So very complicated topic but I always like the Socrates story where he goes into the marketplace and they show him all these luxuries and fineries and he says how many things there are in this world that I do not want right and that's a form of freedom so not wanting something is as good as having it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 幸福，好吧，这是一个非常复杂的话题。但我一直很喜欢苏格拉底的那个故事：他走进集市，人们向他展示各种奢侈品和华美的服饰，他说：“这个世界上有多少东西是我不想要的啊。”对吧？这是一种自由。所以，不想要某样东西，和拥有它一样好。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: in the old story with Alexander Dionius right Alexander goes out and conquers the world and he meets Dionius who's living in a barrel and Dionius says get out of the way you're blocking my son and Alexander says oh how I wish I you know could be like Dionius the next life and Dionis says that's the difference I don't wish that I could sorry Dioynes Dioynes says I I I don't wish to be Alexander

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 在亚历山大帝和第欧根尼的老故事里，对吧，亚历山大征服了世界，遇到了住在木桶里的第欧根尼。第欧根尼说：“走开，你挡住了我的阳光。”亚历山大说：“噢，我多么希望下辈子能像第欧根尼一样。”而第欧根尼说：“这就是区别。我不希望我是亚历山大。”

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: so two paths to happiness and uh one path is success you get what you want you satisfy your material needs or like Dioynes you just don't want in the first place and I'm not sure which one is more valid um and it also depends what you define as success if the end goal is happiness then why not cut to the chase and just go straight for uh does being happy make you less successful that is a conventional wisdom That may even be the practical earned experience of your reality You find that when you're happy you don't want anything So you don't get up and do anything

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以通往幸福有两条路。一条路是成功：你得到了你想要的，满足了你的物质需求；或者像第欧根尼一样，你从一开始就不想要。我不确定哪一条更有效，这也取决于你如何定义成功。如果最终目标是幸福，那为什么不直奔主题呢？幸福会让你变得不那么成功吗？这是一种传统智慧，甚至可能是你现实中获得的实践经验。你会发现当你快乐时，你什么都不想要，所以你不会起床去做任何事。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: On the other hand you know you still got to do something You're an animal You're here You're here to survive You're here to replicate You're driven You're motivated You're going to do something You're not just going to sit there all day Unlikely Some people do Maybe it's in their nature But I think most people still want to act they want to live in the arena

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 另一方面，你知道你还是得做点什么。你是动物，你在这里是为了生存，为了繁衍。你有驱动力，你有动力，你会去做点什么。你不可能整天坐在那里。不太可能。有些人会这样做，也许这是他们的天性。但我认为大多数人还是想行动，想活在竞技场中。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh I found for myself as I've become uh happier is a big word but you know more peaceful more calm more present more uh satisfied with what I have uh I still want to do things I just want to do bigger things I want to do things that are more pure more aligned with uh what I think needs to be done and what I can uniquely do So in that sense I think that being happier can actually make you more successful but your definition of success will likely change along the way

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，我发现对我自己而言，随着我变得——“更幸福”这个词有点大——你知道，更平和、更冷静、更活在当下、更满足于我所拥有的，我仍然想做事情。我只是想做更大的事情。我想做更纯粹的事情，更符合我认为需要做的事情，以及我能独特地做到的事情。所以从这个意义上说，我认为更幸福实际上能让你更成功，但你对成功的定义可能会在这个过程中发生改变。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Is that a realization you think you could have gotten to had you have not had some success in the first place at least for me I always wanted to take the path of material success first I was not going to go be an aesthetic and sit there and renounce everything That just seems too unrealistic and too painful Uh in the story of Buddha he starts out as a prince and then he sees that it's all kind of meaningless because you're still going to get old and die and then he goes into the woods looking for something more I'll take the happy route that involves material success Thank you I think it's quicker in some ways

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你认为如果你当初没有取得一些成功，你能有这样的领悟吗？至少对我来说，我总是想先走物质成功的道路。我不打算去当苦行僧（aesthetic，此处口误应为ascetic），坐在那里放弃一切。这看起来太不现实也太痛苦了。在佛陀的故事里，他一开始是个王子，然后他看到这一切都有点毫无意义，因为你还是会变老死去，于是他走进森林寻找更多的东西。我会选择包含物质成功的幸福之路，谢谢。我觉得这在某些方面更快。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: You know one of your uh insights is it's far easier to achieve our material desires than it is to renounce them And uh it depends on the person but I I think you have to try that path If you want something go get it Uh you know like I I I quipped that the reason to win the game is to be free of it So you you play the games you win the games and then you get hopefully you get bored of the games You don't want to just keep looping on the same game over and over Although a lot of these games are very enticing and have many levels and are relatively open-ended Uh and then you become free of the game uh in a sense that you're no longer trying to win it You know you can win it Uh and either you move to a different game or you play the game for the sheer joy of it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 你知道，你的一个洞见是：实现我们的物质欲望远比放弃它们要容易得多。呃，这因人而异，但我认为你必须尝试那条路。如果你想要什么，就去争取。你知道，就像我打趣说的，赢得游戏的理由是为了从游戏中解脱出来。所以你玩游戏，你赢了游戏，然后希望你对游戏感到厌倦。你不想一直在同一个游戏里循环往复。虽然很多游戏都很诱人，有很多关卡，而且相对开放。然后你从游戏中解脱出来，在这个意义上，你不再试图去赢它。你知道你能赢。你要么换一个不同的游戏，要么纯粹为了乐趣而玩这个游戏。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Yeah You another one of yours most of the gains in life come from suffering in the short term so you can get paid in the long term I think that's classic Winning the marshmallow test on a daily basis But uh there's an interesting challenge where I think people need to avoid becoming uh a suffering addict Sort of using suffering as the proxy for progress as opposed to the outcome of the suffering Right it's like I was in pain not eating the marshmallow I was in pain doing this work I have attached well-being and satisfaction to pain not to what the pain gets me on the other side of it

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 是的。你的另一个观点是：人生中的大部分收获来自于短期的痛苦，这样你才能在长期获得回报。我觉得那是经典的每天都在赢得棉花糖实验。但是，有一个有趣的挑战，我认为人们需要避免成为“痛苦成瘾者”。某种程度上把痛苦当作进步的代理指标，而不是痛苦带来的结果。对吧，就像我不吃棉花糖很痛苦，我做这项工作很痛苦，我把幸福感和满足感与痛苦联系在了一起，而不是痛苦带来的另一端的结果。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: If you define pain as physical pain then it's a real thing It happens and you can't ignore it But that's not what we mean by suffering Suffering is mostly mental anguish and mental pain And it just means you don't want to do the task at hand Uh if you were fine doing the task at hand then you wouldn't be suffering And then the question is what's more effective to suffer along the way or just to interpret it in a way that it's not suffering

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 如果你把痛苦定义为身体上的疼痛，那是真实存在的。它发生了，你无法忽视。但那不是我们要说的“受苦”。受苦主要是精神上的折磨和精神上的痛苦。它仅仅意味着你不想做手头的任务。如果你做手头的任务感觉良好，你就不会感到受苦。那么问题来了，哪种方式更有效？是一路受苦，还是通过某种解读方式让它不再是受苦？

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: you hear from a lot of successful people they look back and they say oh the journey was the fun part right that was actually the entertaining part and I should have enjoyed it more It's a common regret Uh there's a little thought exercise I like to do which is you can go back into your own life and uh try to put yourself in the exact position you were in 5 years ago 10 years ago 15 years ago 20 years ago And you try to remember okay who was I with what was I doing what was I feeling what were my emotions what were my objectives and really really try to transport yourself back and see if there's any advice you'd give yourself Anything you do differently Now you don't have new information And don't pretend you could have gone back and you know bought a stock or bought bought Bitcoin or whatever but just knowing what you know now in terms of your temperament and a little bit of age related experience how would you have done things differently and I think it's a worthwhile exercise to do So don't let me rob you of the conclusion but I'll tell you for me uh I would have done everything the same except I would have done it with less anger less emotion less internal suffering because that was optional It wasn't necessary And I would argue that someone who can do the job uh at least peacefully but maybe happily is going to be more effective than someone who has unnecessary emotional turmoil

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你听到很多成功人士回首往事时说，噢，旅程才是最有趣的部分，对吧，那其实是娱乐的部分，我应该更享受它的。这是一种常见的遗憾。我喜欢做一个小小的思维练习，就是你可以回到你自己的生活中，试着把自己置于5年前、10年前、15年前、20年前的确切位置。试着回忆，好吧，我和谁在一起？我在做什么？我感觉如何？我的情绪怎样？我的目标是什么？真正尝试把自己传送回去，看看你会给自己什么建议。你会做些什么不同的事情吗？现在你并没有新的信息。别假装你可以回去买股票或者买比特币什么的。仅仅基于你现在对心性的了解和一点点年龄带来的经验，你会如何以不同的方式做事？我认为这是一个值得做的练习。别让我剥夺你得出结论的机会，但我告诉你，对我来说，呃，我会做同样的事情，除了我会带着更少的愤怒、更少的情绪、更少的内心煎熬去做，因为那些是可以选择的。那不是必须的。我认为一个能至少平和地，甚至快乐地完成工作的人，会比那些有着不必要情绪动荡的人更有效率。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Well you end up with a series of miserable successes right the outcome may have been the same but the entire experience of getting there and and the journey is not only the reward The journey is the only thing there is You know even success it's human nature to bank it very very quickly right because the normal loop that we run through is you sit around you're bored then you want something then when you want something you decide you're not going to be happy until you get that thing Then you start your bout of suffering or anticipation while you strive to get that thing If you get that thing then you get used to it and then you get bored again Then a few months later you want something else And if you don't get it then you're unhappy for a bit and then you get over it and then you want something else Right that's the normal cycle So whether you're happy or unhappy at the end it tends not to last

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 嗯，你最终会得到一连串悲惨的成功，对吧？结果可能是一样的，但到达那里的整个体验……旅程不仅仅是回报，旅程是唯一存在的东西。你知道，即使是成功，人类的天性也会很快将其习以为常（bank it），对吧？因为我们要经历的正常循环是：你坐着，你感到无聊，然后你想要某样东西。当你想要某样东西时，你决定直到得到那样东西你才会快乐。然后你开始你的受苦或期待，当你努力去争取那样东西时。如果你得到了那样东西，你会习惯它，然后再次感到无聊。几个月后，你又想要别的东西了。如果你没得到它，你会不开心一阵子，然后你会克服它，接着想要别的东西。对吧，这就是正常的循环。所以无论你最后是快乐还是不快乐，往往都不会持久。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Now I don't want to be glib and say that oh there's no point in making money or being successful There absolutely is Money solves all your money problems So it is good to have money Um that said there are those uh those stories I I don't know if you've seen those studies I don't know how real these are A lot of these psych studies don't replicate but it's a fun fun little study that shows that uh people who break their back and people who win the lottery are back to their baseline happiness two years later Yep Again I don't know if that's entirely true I think money can buy you happiness if you earned it because then along the way you have both pride and confidence in yourself and you have a sense of accomplishment and you you know set out to do something and you were right So I I'll bet that lingers and then as I said money solves your money problem So I don't want to be too glib about it but I would say in general this this loop that we run through um of desire dopamine fulfillment unfulfillment like you you have to enjoy the journey The journey is all there is right 99% of your time is spent on the journey

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 现在，我不想油嘴滑舌地说，噢，赚钱或成功没有任何意义。绝对有意义。钱能解决你所有关于钱的问题。所以有钱是好的。即便如此，有些故事……我不知道你是否看过那些研究，我不知道这些有多真实。很多心理学研究都无法复现，但这是一个有趣的小研究，表明那些摔断背的人和中了彩票的人，两年后都回到了他们的基准幸福水平。是的。同样，我不知道这是否完全正确。我认为如果你是凭本事赚来的钱，它能买来幸福。因为在这个过程中，你对自己既有自豪感又有信心，你有成就感，你知道你着手做某事并且你做成了。所以我敢打赌那种感觉会持续下去。而且正如我所说，钱能解决你关于钱的问题。所以我不想说得太轻巧，但我会说总的来说，我们要经历的这个循环——欲望、多巴胺、满足、不满足——你必须享受这段旅程。旅程就是一切，对吧？你99%的时间都花在旅程上。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So what kind of a journey is it if you're not going to enjoy it how do you shortcut that desire contract you could focus you could decide that I don't want most things I think we have a lot of unnecessary desires that we just pick up everywhere We have opinions on everything judgments and everything Uh so I think just knowing that those are the source of unhappiness uh will make you be choosy about your desires And frankly if you want to be successful you have to be choosy about your desires You have to focus You can't be great at everything You can't be great at everything You're just going to waste your energy and waste your time

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以如果你不打算享受它，那算什么旅程呢？你如何缩短那个“欲望契约”？你可以专注，你可以决定我不想要大部分东西。我认为我们有很多不必要的欲望，我们在各处随意拾起。我们对每件事都有意见，对每件事都有评判。所以我想，仅仅知道这些是不快乐的源泉，就会让你对你的欲望变得挑剔。坦率地说，如果你想成功，你必须对你的欲望挑剔。你必须专注。你不可能在每件事上都很棒。你不可能样样精通。你只会浪费你的精力，浪费你的时间。

章节 02：名望的陷阱与身份游戏

📝 本节摘要：

本章深入探讨了名望的双刃剑效应。Naval 指出，虽然名望能带来特权与关注，但也伴随着隐私丧失和被迫“表演”的巨大代价。他区分了“赢得的名望”（如伟大的建设者或领袖）与“空洞的名望”，并警告人们不要陷入“愚蠢的一致性”——即为了维护公众形象而害怕改变观点。最后，他对比了“身份游戏”（零和博弈、等级森严）与“财富游戏”（正和博弈、创造丰裕），建议人们优先追求财富创造而非社会地位。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Is fame a worthwhile goal uh it gets you invited to better parties gets you into better restaurants

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 名望是一个值得追求的目标吗？呃，它能让你受邀参加更好的派对，让你进入更好的餐厅。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh fame So fa fame is this funny thing where a lot of people know you but you don't know them And uh it does get you put on a pedestal Uh it can get you what you want uh at a at a distance So I wouldn't say it's worthless Obviously people want it for a reason Um it's high status so it attracts the opposite sex Uh especially for men it attracts women Uh that said it is high cost It means you have no privacy Um you do have weirdos and lunatics Uh you do get hit up a lot for weird things Uh and you're on a stage so you're forced to perform so you're forced to be consistent with your past proclamations and actions and you're going to have haters and all that nonsense But the fact that we do it the fact that we all seem to want it means that it would be disingenuous to say "Oh no no I'm famous." But you don't want to be famous

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，名望。名望是个有趣的东西，很多人认识你，但你不认识他们。呃，它确实把你捧上了神坛。它能让你在保持距离的情况下得到你想要的东西。所以我不会说它一文不值。显然人们想要它是基于某种原因的。呃，它是高地位的象征，所以它能吸引异性。尤其是对男性来说，它能吸引女性。话虽如此，它的代价很高。这意味着你没有隐私。呃，你确实会遇到怪人和疯子。呃，你确实会被很多奇怪的事情找上门。而且你在舞台上，所以你被迫表演，你被迫与你过去的声明和行动保持一致，你会遇到黑粉和所有那些废话。但事实上我们都在追求它，事实上我们似乎都想要它，这意味着如果说“噢，不不，我很有名，但你不会想出名的”是虚伪的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um that said I think fame like anything else is best produced as a or pursued as a byproduct of something potentially more worthwhile Um wanting to be famous and craving to be famous and being famous for being famous these are sort of traps Fame for fame's sake Yeah Exactly So it's better that it's earned fame Uh so for example earn respect in the tribe is you do things that are good for the tribe Uh who are the most famous people in human history uh there uh you know there there are people who sort of transcended the self The Buddhas and the Jesuses and the Muhammads of the world

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 话虽如此，我认为名望就像其他任何东西一样，最好是作为某种更有价值事物的副产品而产生或追求。呃，想要出名、渴望出名、因为出名而出名，这些某种程度上是陷阱。为了名声而名声。是的，没错。所以最好是“赢得的名望”。比如，在部落中赢得尊重是因为你做了对部落有益的事情。呃，人类历史上最著名的人是谁？呃，你知道，有一些超越了自我的人。世界上的佛陀、耶稣和穆罕默德。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Who else is famous uh the artists are famous You know art lasts for a long time The scientists are famous They discover things The conquerors are famous presumably because they conquered for their tribe There was someone that they were fighting for So generally the higher up you rise by doing things for greater and greater groups of people even though it may be considered tyrannical or negative like uh you know Jenghaskhan is famous but uh to the Mongols he was doing good to the rest of them not so much uh the higher level you're operating at the more people you're taking care of the more you sort of earn respect and fame and I think those are good reasons to be famous

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 还有谁是有名的？呃，艺术家是有名的，你知道艺术能流传很久。科学家是有名的，他们发现了事物。征服者是有名的，大概是因为他们为自己的部落征战，他们是为了某些人而战。所以通常来说，你通过为越来越大的群体做事而升得越高——即使这可能被认为是暴虐或消极的，比如，你知道成吉思汗很有名，但呃，对蒙古人来说他在做好事，对其他人来说就没那么好了——你运作的层次越高，你照顾的人越多，你就越能赢得尊重和名望，我认为这些是出名的好理由。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: if if if fame is empty if you're famous just cuz your name showed up in a lot of places or your face showed up in a lot of places then that's a hollow fame and I think deep down you will know that and so it'll be fragile and you'll always be afraid of losing it and then you'll be forced to perform so the kind of fame that uh pure actors and celebrities have I wouldn't want but the kind of fame that's earned because you did something useful uh why dodge that

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 如果名望是空洞的，如果你出名仅仅是因为你的名字出现在很多地方，或者你的脸出现在很多地方，那就是一种空洞的名望。而且我认为在内心深处你会知道这一点，所以它会很脆弱，你会总是害怕失去它，然后你会被迫去表演。所以那种纯粹的演员和名人拥有的名望，我并不想要。但那种因为你做了有用的事情而赢得的名望，为什么要回避呢？

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: now you can there's a challenge I think especially if people make uh very loud public proclamations about things you mentioned there about um you're almost hostage to the things that you used to say that um being able to update your opinions and change your mind looks very similar to the internet as hypocrisy does

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 现在你可以……这有一个挑战，我认为特别是如果人们对某些事情发表了非常高调的公开声明。你刚才提到，你几乎成了你过去言论的人质。那种能够更新观点和改变主意的行为，在互联网看来和虚伪非常相似。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: No no no The difference between me saying something in the past and saying something different now is perhaps I've learned perhaps I've updated my beliefs but so few people do it in a legitimate way I think that the grifter shill you see this is the the the smoking gun that shows that he didn't really believe that thing all along Right And uh yeah I I went to a retreat in LA a couple of years ago and there was a guy that I used to follow that a big um business and productivity advice content creator really really successful and he just totally stepped back from everything and went uh like monk mode and focused on his business I asked him why and he said uh I started feeling like I had to live up to in private the things that I was saying in public

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 不不不。我在过去说的话和现在说的不同，区别在于也许我学到了东西，也许我更新了我的信念。但很少有人以正当的方式这样做。我认为你看到的那些骗子托儿（grifter shill），这是一个确凿的证据，表明他从一开始就不真的相信那个东西。对吧。而且，呃，是的，几年前我在洛杉矶参加了一个静修会，有一个我以前关注的人，是一个很大的、呃、商业和生产力建议的内容创作者，非常非常成功。但他彻底退出了这一切，进入了呃，像是僧侣模式（monk mode），专注于他的生意。我问他为什么，他说：“呃，我开始觉得我在私下里必须去践行我在公开场合说的那些东西。”

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Right Yeah It's a it's a what was it that uh who said it was a mein that um foolish consistency is a hobgoblin of little minds right um but essentially look all life is all learning is error correction right every knowledge creation system works through correcting errors making guesses and correcting errors so by definition if you're learning you're going to be wrong most of the time and you'll be updating your priors

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 对，是的。那是……那是谁说的？是爱默生（Emerson）说的吗？“愚蠢的一致性是渺小灵魂的怪物（hobgoblin of little minds）”，对吧。但本质上，看，所有的生活，所有的学习都是纠错。对吧，每一个知识创造系统都是通过纠正错误来运作的，做出猜测并纠正错误。所以根据定义，如果你在学习，你在大部分时间里都会是错的，你会不断更新你的先验知识。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: and so for example I did this Joe Rogan podcast I don't know it's like eight or nine years ago um and people will call out like the one thing that didn't turn out to be correct right and it's just like and they just beat on it because it it helps them in their mind raise their status a little bit Aha I caught him in an error Well I think if you catch someone in a blatant lie where there's believe one thing and they say another that's legit That's a character flaw They shouldn't be lying But on the other hand if they just made a guess at something and they got it wrong And by the way mostly it's about the AI AGI thing And I think I'm still right about that but it's a different story Um people who think we have achieved AGI just fail a touring test from their side Um but uh it's funny how people latch on to single proclamations But the reality is all of us are dynamical systems We're always changing We're always learning We're always growing And uh hopefully we're correcting errors What you don't want to be doing is lying in public so that because you're you're trying to look good And I think people can smell that I I I what this world really lacks right now is authenticity and because everybody wants something They want to be seen as something They want to be something that they're not And so you do catch a lot of people uh saying things that they don't really believe And I think people are very sensitive to that Uh bullshit radars have become hypers sensitized to try and work out whether or not this person means the thing that they're saying

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 举个例子，我做了那个 Joe Rogan 的播客，我不知道，大概是八九年前的事了。人们会挑出其中一件最后证明不正确的事情，对吧，然后他们就会抓住不放。因为这在他们心中有助于稍微提升一点他们的地位。“哈！我抓住了他的错误。”嗯，我认为如果你抓住了某人公然撒谎——他们相信一套却说另一套——那是合理的。那是性格缺陷，他们不应该撒谎。但另一方面，如果他们只是对某事做了一个猜测，而他们猜错了。顺便说一下，这主要关于 AI AGI（通用人工智能）那件事。而且我认为我在那件事上仍然是对的，那是另一个故事了。那些认为我们已经实现了 AGI 的人，只是他们自己没通过图灵测试。呃，有趣的是人们如何死死抓住某一个声明不放。但现实是，我们所有人都是动态系统。我们一直在改变，一直在学习，一直在成长。而且呃，希望我们在纠正错误。你不应该做的是在公开场合撒谎，只是为了让自己看起来不错。我认为人们能闻出那种味道。我认为这个世界现在真正缺乏的是真诚（authenticity），因为每个人都想要点什么。他们想被看作某种人，他们想成为某种他们不是的人。所以你确实抓到很多人呃，在说他们并不真正相信的话。我认为人们对此非常敏感。呃，“屁话雷达”（bullshit radars）已经变得高度敏感，试图分辨这个人是否真的相信他所说的话。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Yeah I mean they they a lot of people are wrong Most of us are wrong most of the time especially in any new endeavor Difference between being wrong and disingenuous though purposefully wrong Correct Exactly So I think I think that's the big difference If someone is wrong no big deal As long as they have a genuine reason for saying what they're saying or believing what they're believing But if they are lying to elevate their status or their appearance or to live up to some expectation that's the mistake And that's a mistake not just for the listener it's a mistake for themselves cuz then you're going to get trapped in a hall of mirrors You yourself are going to be consistent with your past proclamations So if you're lying to others you're going to be lying to yourself You're puppeted by a person that you are not even That's right

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 是的，我的意思是，很多人都会错。我们大多数人在大多数时候都是错的，尤其是在任何新的尝试中。但是在“错误”和“虚伪”（即故意犯错）之间有区别。

[Naval Ravikant]: 正确。完全正确。所以我认为那是巨大的区别。如果某人错了，没什么大不了的。只要他们有真诚的理由去说他们所说的，或相信他们所相信的。但如果他们为了提升自己的地位、形象或为了不辜负某种期望而撒谎，那就是错误。这不仅是对听众的错误，也是对他们自己的错误，因为那样你就会被困在镜厅（hall of mirrors）里。你自己也要与你过去的声明保持一致。所以如果你对别人撒谎，你也会对自己撒谎。你被一个甚至不是你的人所操纵。

[Naval Ravikant]: 没错。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Yeah It's it's like what was that line there's you're you're basically trying to impress people who you know don't care about you Um so they don't like the real you and if they saw the real you they wouldn't care and the people who would like the real you don't get to see the real you so they pass you by right you only want the respect of the very very few people that you respect Uh trying to demand respect from the masses is a fool's errand status games the allure of acrewing whether it's fame actual fame or just the competition comparison trap it's always there Uh there's a real draw of being swayed by social approval How should people learn to get less distracted by status games in that way

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 是的，这就像那句台词说的……你基本上是在试图打动那些你知道并不在乎你的人。呃，所以他们不喜欢的其实是真实的你，如果他们看到了真实的你，他们也不会在乎；而那些会喜欢真实你的人却看不到真实的你，所以他们与你擦肩而过。对吧，你只想要极少数你尊重的人的尊重。呃，试图向大众索求尊重是愚蠢的差事。身份游戏（status games），积累名望的诱惑，无论是真正的名望还是仅仅是竞争比较的陷阱，它总是存在的。呃，被社会认可所左右有着真正的吸引力。人们应该如何学会减少被这种身份游戏分心？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: i think it it just helps to see that status games don't matter as much as they used to uh in old society let's go back hunter gatherer times there was no such thing as wealth You just had what you could carry Um there was no stored wealth So wealth games didn't really exist to wealth creation games All that existed was status games If you were high status then you got what little was available first Um but even back then you had to earn your status by taking care of the tribe

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我认为明白身份游戏不再像过去那么重要会有所帮助。呃，在旧社会，让我们回到狩猎采集时代，那时没有财富这种东西。你只拥有你能携带的东西。呃，没有储存的财富。所以财富游戏、财富创造游戏并不真正存在。存在的只有身份游戏。如果你地位高，你就能先得到那一点点可用的资源。呃，但即使在那个时候，你也必须通过照顾部落来赢得你的地位。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh now we have wealth creation where you can actually create a product or a service you can scale that product or service and you can provide abundance for a lot of people Uh and that's not zero sum that's a positive sum game I can be wealthy you can be wealthy we can create things together and clearly since we are all collectively far far wealthier than we were in huntergatherer times Uh wealth creation is positive but status is limited There's limited status to go around It's a ranking ladder It's a hierarchy And so it's a rise in status Somebody else has a lower in status

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，现在我们有了财富创造，你可以真正创造一个产品或服务，你可以扩展那个产品或服务，你可以为很多人提供丰裕。呃，那不是零和游戏，那是正和游戏。我可以富有，你可以富有，我们可以一起创造东西。显然，既然我们集体上比狩猎采集时代要富有得多，呃，财富创造是积极的。但地位是有限的。周围的地位是有限的。这是一个排名阶梯，这是一个层级结构。所以一个人地位上升，另一个人地位就会下降。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Now you can have multiple kinds of status So you can expand some kinds of status but it's not like wealth creation where it can go infinitely where we can all be you know living in the stars and moon bases or Mars colonies or what have you So just realize that status games are inherently limited Uh they're always combative Um they always require uh direct combat whereas uh wealth creation games can be just you're creating products You don't have to fight anybody else Yes in the marketplace your product has to succeed but that's not quite the same as uh invective against other people or being angry with other people or feeling pushed down or pushed up or having a beef with somebody So I would argue that wealth creation games are both more pleasant Uh they're positive sum and they actually have uh concrete material returns If you have more money you can buy more

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 现在的确可以有多种类型的地位。所以你可以扩展某些类型的地位，但这不像财富创造那样可以无限扩展，我们可以都生活在星星上、月球基地或火星殖民地什么的。所以要意识到身份游戏本质上是有限的。呃，它们总是充满斗争的。呃，它们总是需要呃直接的战斗。而呃财富创造游戏可以仅仅是你创造产品。你不必和别人打架。是的，在市场上你的产品必须成功，但这与呃辱骂他人、对别人生气、感到被压制或被捧杀、或者与某人有过节完全不同。所以我认为财富创造游戏既更令人愉快——呃，它们是正和的——而且它们实际上有呃具体的物质回报。如果你有更多的钱，你可以买更多的东西。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Show me where you can exchange your status at the bank

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 告诉我你在银行哪里可以兑换你的地位。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Exactly Yeah It's it's it's vague and it's fuzzy Now you see people get rich they have money what do they want they want status So they go to Hollywood start starring in movies they donate to nonprofits they go to KS or Davos or what have you Um and they start trying to trade the money for status So you know people always want what they don't have Uh and we are evolutionarily hardwired for status because as I said wealth creation didn't really exist until the agricultural revolution uh when you could store grain and then the industrial revolution took it to another level and now the information age is taking it to yet another level

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 没错，是的。它是模糊不清的。现在你看到人们变富了，他们有钱了，他们想要什么？他们想要地位。所以他们去好莱坞，开始演电影，他们捐款给非营利组织，他们去戛纳或达沃斯什么的。呃，他们开始试图用钱换地位。所以你知道，人们总是想要他们没有的东西。呃，我们在进化上就被硬编码为追求地位，因为正如我所说，财富创造直到农业革命才真正存在，呃，那时你可以储存谷物，然后工业革命将其提升到了另一个层次，现在信息时代又将其提升到了一个新的层次。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: But there's never been an easier time to make money Yes it's still hard but there's never been an easier time to create wealth because there's so much leverage out there There's so much opportunity You still have to go find it It's not easy It's not going to fall on your lap and you have to learn something and know something and do something interesting But nevertheless it's possible to many more people A few hundred years ago you were born a surf you were going to die a surf There was almost no way out of that That's changed And so I would argue that you're better off focusing on wealth games and status games If you're trying to um build up for example your following on a social network and get famous and then get rich off of being famous that's a much harder path than getting rich first Um and then go for your fame afterwards would be my advice

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 但现在是赚钱最容易的时候。是的，它仍然很难，但从未有过比现在更容易创造财富的时候，因为外面有太多的杠杆。有太多的机会。你仍然需要去寻找它。这不容易。它不会掉到你的腿上，你必须学习一些东西，知道一些东西，做一些有趣的事情。但尽管如此，对更多的人来说这成为了可能。几百年前，你生来是农奴（serf），你会死为农奴。几乎没有出路。这已经改变了。所以我认为你最好专注于财富游戏而不是身份游戏。如果你试图呃，例如在社交网络上建立你的粉丝群并成名，然后通过名气发财，那是一条比先致富要难得多的路。呃，然后再去追求你的名气，这会是我的建议。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Well a lot of people do that as you said It's funny how uh people who have achieved such a level of wealth that you don't think why do you need the status given that most people use status to then try and cash in to achieve wealth if you've achieved fucky money already if you're post money or uh asset heavy as it's known Um why are you trying to go in the other direction well as you said because we've we've got an illustrious history biologically of wanting status and wealth is kind of novel It's new It's new Wealth is uh something that you have to understand more intellectually Yeah there's a physical component more food more survival but uh to truly understand the effects and the powers and the abilities and limitations uh and the advantages and disadvantages of wealth you have to use your neoortex a lot more

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 嗯，很多人都这样做，正如你所说。有趣的是，呃，那些已经达到了某种财富水平的人，你会想你为什么还需要地位？既然大多数人利用地位是为了变现以获取财富。如果你已经拥有了“去你妈的钱”（fuck-you money），如果你已经“后金钱时代”（post-money）或者呃所谓的“重资产”了。呃，你为什么要反方向走？嗯，正如你所说，因为我们在生物学上有着辉煌的追求地位的历史，而财富有点新奇。它是新的。它是新的。财富是呃你需要更多从智力上去理解的东西。是的，有一个物理成分——更多的食物、更多的生存——但呃要真正理解财富的影响、力量、能力和局限性，呃以及优缺点，你必须更多地使用你的新皮层。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Does that mean it's not limbic the reason to play the game is to win the game and be done with it is harder to win and be done with for status than it is for wealth That's a good observation I had thought that through but you're right Yeah I think that's right I think you people will always want more status Uh but I think you can be satisfied at a certain level of wealth Well as well you always have this sort of sense This is what leaderboards are right this is the the billboard chart right and it is zero sum and it is I guess you know the Forbes richest people on the planet thing That one's harder to climb the ladder on But uh the fact that for example iTunes and YouTube can put you in competition against your contemporaries every single day and make you go up and down and show you likes and comments and ratings This is how much you're up Exactly They they keep you running on that treadmill forever

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 这是否意味着它不是边缘系统（limbic）层面的？玩游戏的理由是赢得游戏并结束它。对于地位来说，赢得并结束游戏比财富更难。

[Chris Williamson]: 这是一个很好的观察。我没想透这一点，但你是对的。

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的，我认为是对的。我认为人们总是想要更多的地位。呃，但我认为你可以在一定的财富水平上感到满足。

[Chris Williamson]: 嗯，你也总是有这种感觉……这就是排行榜的意义，对吧，这就是公告牌图表，它是零和的。我想虽然福布斯全球富豪榜那种更难攀登，但呃，事实是，例如 iTunes 和 YouTube 让你每天都与同龄人竞争，让你上上下下，向你展示点赞、评论和评分。这是你上升了多少。

[Naval Ravikant]: 没错。他们让你永远在那台跑步机上跑。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Jimmy Carr has this cool idea where he says trajectory is more important than position So if you are number 101 in the world but last year you were number 200 versus you're number two in the world but last year you were number one there is this sense of the deceleration is very very tangible and um it's again it goes back to evolution you know something that is bleeding eventually dies unless you stop the bleeding so you're you're hardwired not to lose what you have and because we evolve in conditions where we're so close to just not surviving uh you don't want to give anything up It's hardwired into us to not give anything up So you grip tightly That's right

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: Jimmy Carr 有一个很酷的观点，他说“轨迹比位置更重要”。所以如果你是世界第 101 名，但去年你是第 200 名；对比你是世界第 2 名，但去年你是第 1 名。那种减速的感觉是非常非常切实的。而且呃，这又回到了进化。你知道，流血的东西如果不止血最终会死，所以你被硬编码为不能失去你所拥有的。而且因为我们在几乎无法生存的条件下进化，呃，你不想放弃任何东西。不放弃任何东西被硬编码在我们体内。所以你抓得很紧。

[Naval Ravikant]: 没错。

章节 03：构建自尊：内在法则与长期主义

📝 本节摘要：

本章聚焦于自尊的本质与构建方法。Naval 将自尊定义为“你与自己的声誉”，指出通过严格遵守个人道德准则、做出牺牲以及长期坚持美德，可以赢得自我尊重。他从博弈论角度（如“猎鹿博弈”）分析了诚实与美德的长期功利性，并提出了“内在黄金法则”（Internal Golden Rule）：像你希望别人对待你那样对待自己。最后，他探讨了“爱”与“被爱”的区别，认为主动去爱的感觉比渴望被爱更能让人扩张自我。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: The worst outcome in the world is not having self-esteem Why yeah that's a tough one Uh well I I I look at the people and I don't want to offend anybody but I look at the people who don't like themselves and that's the toughest slot because they're always wrestling with themselves and it's hard enough to face the outside world Um and no one's going to like you more than you like yourself So if you're struggling with yourself then the outside world becomes an insurmountable challenge

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 世界上最糟糕的结局就是没有自尊。为什么？是的，这是个棘手的问题。呃，我看那些……我不想冒犯任何人，但我看那些不喜欢自己的人，那是处境最艰难的一类人。因为他们总是在与自己搏斗，而面对外部世界已经够难的了。呃，没有人会比你更喜欢你自己。所以如果你还在和自己过不去，那么外部世界就会变成一个不可逾越的挑战。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And it's hard to say why people have low self-esteem It might be genetic It might just be circumstantial A lot of times I think it's cuz they just weren't unconditionally loved as a child and that sort of seeps in at a deep core level Um but self-esteem issues can be the most limiting Uh one interesting thought is that you know to some extent self-esteem is a reputation you have with yourself Um you're watching yourself at all times You know what you're doing and you have your own moral code Everyone has a different moral code But if you don't live up to your own moral code the same code that you hold others to uh it will damage your self-esteem

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 很难说人们为什么自尊心低。可能是基因，也可能只是环境使然。很多时候我觉得是因为他们在童年时期没有被无条件地爱过，那种感觉渗透到了内心深处。呃，但自尊问题可能是最具限制性的。呃，一个有趣的观点是，在某种程度上，自尊是你与自己的声誉。呃，你时刻都在注视着自己。你知道自己在做什么，你有自己的道德准则。每个人的道德准则都不同。但如果你不能达到你自己的道德准则——那个你用来要求别人的准则——呃，那就会损害你的自尊。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So perhaps one way to build up your self-esteem is to live up to your own code very rigorously Have one and then live up to it Uh another way to raise your self-esteem might be to do things for others Uh if I look back on my life and you know what are the moments that I'm actually proud of there's very far and few between and it's not that often and it's not the things you would expect It's not the material success It's not having learned this thing or that It's when I made a sacrifice for somebody or something that I loved And uh that's when I'm actually ironically most proud Now that's through an explicit mental exercise But I'll bet you at some level I'm recording that implicitly So that tells me that even if I am not being loved and the way to create love is to give love to to express love through sacrifice and through duty And so I think doing things like that can build up your self-esteem really fast

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以也许建立自尊的一种方法是非常严格地践行你自己的准则。拥有一个准则，然后去践行它。呃，另一种提升自尊的方法可能是为他人做事。呃，如果回顾我的一生，你知道我真正感到自豪的时刻是什么吗？其实非常少，并不经常发生，而且不是你预想的那些事。不是物质上的成功，也不是学会了这个或那个。而是当我为我所爱的人或事做出牺牲的时候。呃，讽刺的是，那才是我真正最自豪的时候。那是通过显性的思维练习意识到的。但我敢打赌，在某种层面上，我也在隐性地记录着这些。所以这告诉我，即使我没有被爱，创造爱的方式是去给予爱，通过牺牲和责任来表达爱。所以我认为做这样的事情可以非常快地建立你的自尊。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: It's interesting when you talk about sacrifice because a lot of the time people say "I sacrificed so much for my job." It's like "Yeah but that was you sacrificing something that you wanted less for something that you wanted more as opposed to genuinely taking some sort of cost." And uh yeah I wonder whether if self-esteem is you adhering to your internal your your actions and your values aligning um even when it's difficult or perhaps even more so when it's difficult I wonder whether there is a price that people who are more introspective high integrity pay because you think well you've got this uh heavy set of overheads that you need to pay in some way

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 当你谈到牺牲时很有趣，因为很多时候人们说“我为工作牺牲了那么多”。但这就像是，“是的，但那是你为了你更想要的东西而牺牲了你没那么想要的东西，而不是真正承担了某种代价。”而且，呃，是的，我想如果自尊是你坚持你的内在……你的行动和你的价值观保持一致，呃，即使是在困难的时候，或者也许正因为是在困难的时候。我想知道那些更内省、更正直的人是否需要付出代价？因为你会想，好吧，你有一套沉重的“管理费用”（overheads）需要以某种方式支付。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Well if being ethical were profitable everybody would do it right so uh you at some level it does involve a sacrifice Uh but that sacrifice can also be thought of as you're thinking for the long term rather than the short term Um for example the virtues are the set of uh virtues a set of beliefs that if everybody in society followed them as individuals it would lead to win-win outcomes for everybody So if I am honest and you are honest then we can do business more easily We can interact more easily because we can trust each other So even though there might be a few liars in the system as long as there aren't too many liars and too many cheaters uh a high trust society where everybody's honest is better off

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 嗯，如果讲道德是有利可图的，每个人都会去做，对吧？所以呃，在某种程度上它确实涉及牺牲。呃，但这种牺牲也可以被看作是你为长期而非短期考虑。呃，例如，美德是一套……美德是一套信念，如果社会中的每个人都作为个体遵循它们，就会给每个人带来双赢的结果。所以如果我是诚实的，你是诚实的，那么我们可以更容易地做生意。我们可以更容易地互动，因为我们可以互相信任。所以即使系统中可能有一些骗子，只要骗子和作弊者不太多，呃，一个人人都诚实的高信任社会是更好的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And I think a lot of the virtues work this way right if I don't go around sleeping with your wife and you don't sleep with mine and you know if I don't take all the food that's at the table first and so on then we all get along better and we can play win-win games Uh in game theory the most famous game is prisoners dilemma But that's all about everybody cheating and the Nash equilibrium The stable equilibrium there is everybody cheats and you're for the only way you can be you can play a win-win game is if you have long-term iterated moves But that's not actually the most common game played in society The most common game played as one called a stags hunt where if we cooperate we can bring down a big stag and both have big dinners but if we don't cooperate then we have to go hunt like rabbits and we each have small dinners

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我认为很多美德都是这样运作的，对吧？如果我不去睡你的老婆，你也不睡我的，你知道，如果我不先把桌上的食物都拿走等等，那么我们都会相处得更好，我们可以玩双赢的游戏。呃，在博弈论中，最著名的游戏是囚徒困境。但那完全是关于每个人都作弊，纳什均衡——那个稳定的均衡点——是每个人都作弊。你唯一能玩双赢游戏的方式是如果你有长期的重复博弈。但这实际上不是社会中最常见的游戏。最常见的游戏叫做“猎鹿博弈”（stag hunt）：如果我们合作，我们可以拿下一头大鹿，我们都能享用大餐；但如果我们不合作，我们就得去抓兔子，我们每个人只能吃顿小的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So most of uh and and that game has two stable equilibriums And one could be where we're both hunting the rabbit and one could be where we're hunting the stag So the high trust society is a more most more virtuous society where I can trust you to come hunt the stag with me and show up on time and do the work and divide it up properly So you want to live in a system where everybody has their own set of virtues and follows them and then we all win But I would argue you don't need to do that for sacrifice You don't need to do that for other people You can do it just purely for yourself You will have higher self-esteem You will attract other high virtue people

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以大多数呃……那个游戏有两个稳定的均衡点。一个是我们在抓兔子，一个是我们在猎鹿。所以高信任社会是一个更……更有德行的社会，在那里我可以信任你会来和我一起猎鹿，准时出现，完成工作，并且合理分配。所以你想生活在一个每个人都有自己的一套美德并遵循它的系统中，然后我们都赢了。但我认为你不需要为了牺牲而这样做。你不需要为了别人而这样做。你可以纯粹为了你自己而做。你会拥有更高的自尊。你会吸引其他高尚的人。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Would I go on a stag hunt with me correct Yeah that's right And if you're the kind of person if you're the kind of person who long-term signals ethics and virtues then you will attract other people who are ethical and virtuous Whereas if you are a shark you will eventually find yourself swimming entirely amongst sharks And that's an unpleasant existence But again this goes back to the equivalent of the marshmallow test And by the way the marshmallow test does not replicate I saw it replication crisis hard recently But it is about trading off the short term for the long term Uh and so I think for a lot of these so-called virtues there are long-term selfish reasons to be virtuous

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: “我会愿意和自己去猎鹿吗？”对吧？

[Naval Ravikant]: 没错。那是对的。如果你是那种长期释放道德和美德信号的人，那么你会吸引其他有道德和美德的人。反之，如果你是一条鲨鱼，你最终会发现自己完全在鲨鱼群中游泳。那是一种不愉快的生存状态。但这又要回到等同于棉花糖实验的问题上。顺便说一下，棉花糖实验无法复现，我最近看到它的复现危机很严重。但这关于用短期交换长期。呃，所以我认为对于很多这些所谓的美德，保持美德有着长期的自私理由。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Yeah Uh did you deal with self-doubt in the past is that something that was a hurdle for you to overcome yes and no I think I I dealt with self-doubt in the sense that oh I don't know what I'm doing and I need to figure it out Um but I didn't doubt myself in the way of somebody else knows better than me for me or that you know I'm an idiot or I'm not worthwhile or anything that I I guess I had the benefit of I grew up with a lot of love like the people around me love me unconditionally And so that just gave me a lot of confidence Uh not the kind of confidence that would say I have the answer but the kind of confidence that I will figure it out and I know what I want or only I am a good arbiter of what I want

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 是的。呃，你过去处理过自我怀疑吗？那是你需要克服的障碍吗？

[Naval Ravikant]: 是也不是。我想我处理过自我怀疑，那种“噢，我不知道我在做什么，我需要搞清楚”的感觉。但我没有那种“别人比我更了解我自己”或者“你知道，我是个白痴，我不值得”或者类似的自我怀疑。我想我有幸在很多爱中长大，周围的人无条件地爱我。这给了我很多自信。呃，不是那种说“我有答案”的自信，而是那种“我会搞清楚的，我知道我想要什么，或者只有我是我想要什么的最佳裁决者”的自信。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: But it's such a good point about even if you think you're not consciously logging the stuff that you're doing there is some that's in the back of your mind Was it the Damon is that what the ancient Greeks or something used to talk about yeah The Yeah Also in computer science like there's a concept of a demon which is a uh a program that's always running in the background You can't see it Okay Um but yeah it probably comes from the ancient Greek demon Uh but yeah I what you know that you don't even know you know is far greater than what you know you know right you can't even articulate most of the things you know There are feelings you have that have no words for them There are thoughts you have that are felt within the body or subconsciously that you never articulate to yourself You don't really you can't articulate the rules of grammar yet you exercise them effortlessly when you speak

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 但这是一个很好的观点，即使你认为你没有有意识地记录你所做的事情，有一些东西还是在你的脑后。是“Damon”（灵魔）吗？那是古希腊人还是什么人经常谈论的东西？

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的。没错。在计算机科学里也有“Daemon”（守护进程）的概念，就是一个呃……一直在后台运行的程序。你看不到它。好的。呃，但这可能源自古希腊的“Daemon”。但是是的，你知道那些你甚至不知道自己知道的东西，远比你知道自己知道的东西要多。对吧，你甚至无法表达你所知道的大部分事情。你有无法用语言表达的感觉。你有在体内或潜意识中感觉到但从未对自己表达过的想法。你并不能真正表达语法的规则，但当你说话时你会毫不费力地运用它们。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So I would argue that your implicit knowledge and your knowledge that is unknown to yourself is far greater than the knowledge you can articulate and that you can communicate And so at some level you're always watching yourself That's what your consciousness is right it's the thing that's watching everything including your mind including your body M so if you want to uh have high self-esteem then earn your own selfrespect I had this idea the internal golden rule So the golden rule says treat others the way that you should be treated You want to be treated The internal golden rule says treat yourself like others should have treated you and it was a a repost to maybe people that didn't grow up with unconditional love

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以我认为你的隐性知识和你自己不知道的知识，远大于你能表达和交流的知识。所以在某种程度上，你总是在注视着自己。那就是你的意识，对吧？它是那个注视着一切的东西，包括你的头脑，包括你的身体。所以如果你想呃拥有高自尊，那就赢得你自己的自尊。我有这样一个想法：“内在黄金法则”（The Internal Golden Rule）。黄金法则是说：像你希望被对待的那样对待别人。而内在黄金法则是说：像别人应该对待你的那样对待你自己。这也许是对那些没有在无条件爱中长大的人的一个回应。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: On the love thing one of the interesting things about love is you can try to remember the feeling of being loved So go back to when someone was in love with you or someone did love you and like really remember that feeling like really sit with it and try to recreate it within yourself and then go to the feeling of you loving someone and when you were in love And I'm not even talking about romantic love necessarily So be a little careful there I'm talking more about like love for it can sometimes get complex if you're talking about past romantic love right a sibling or a child or something like that or or a parent and uh think about when you felt love towards someone or something And now which is better and I would argue that the feeling of being in love is actually more exhilarating than the feeling of being loved Being loved is a little clawing It's a little too sweet You kind of want to push the person away It's a little embarrassing And you know that if that person is too much into it that you feel constrained On the other hand the feeling of being in love is very expansive It's very open It actually makes you a better version of yourself It makes you want to be a better person And so you can create love anytime you want It's just that craving to receive it That's the problem

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 关于爱，有一件有趣的事是，你可以试着回忆被爱的感觉。回到某人爱上你或某人确实爱你的时候，真正回忆那种感觉，真正和它待在一起，试着在你自己内心重建它。然后去感受你爱某人时的感觉，当你在爱中时。我甚至不一定是指浪漫的爱，所以这里要小心一点。我更多是指那种爱……如果你谈论过去的浪漫爱情有时会变得复杂，对吧……指对兄弟姐妹、孩子或类似的人，或者父母。呃，想想当你对某人或某事感到爱的时候。现在，哪一个更好？我会认为，“在爱中”（being in love，主动去爱）的感觉实际上比“被爱”（being loved）的感觉更令人振奋。被爱有点让人抓狂（cloying，腻人），有点太甜了。你甚至有点想把那个人推开，有点尴尬。而且你知道如果那个人太投入，你会感到受束缚。另一方面，“在爱中”的感觉是非常扩张的。它是非常开放的。它实际上让你成为更好的自己。它让你想成为一个更好的人。所以你随时可以创造爱。只是那种想要“接受爱”的渴望，那才是问题所在。

章节 04：整体性自私：时间管理与绝对自由

📝 本节摘要：

本章中，Naval 阐述了“整体性自私”（Holistic Selfishness）的概念，即为了长期的产出与贡献，必须在当下毫不妥协地优先考虑自己的时间与状态。他分享了受 Marc Andreessen 启发而“删除日程表”的做法，拒绝被未来的义务绑架，以免日程像“一坨屎”一样堵塞当下的心流。Naval 强调“灵感是易逝的”（Inspiration is perishable），真正的学习和创造必须在好奇心迸发的瞬间立即行动。此外，他指出在人生的“利用阶段”（Exploitation Phase），应默认对所有请求说“不”，因为保护注意力是扩大规模（Scaling）和维持高效产出的唯一途径。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: The aligned with thing is interesting Uh I'm going to try and put this across as delicately as I can I would say from the bit of time that we'd spent together you have a really interesting trait of holistic selfishness Uh you're sort of prepared to put yourself first um you seem largely unfazed by saying or doing things that might might result in other people feeling a little bit awkward if it's truthful for you Uh it's like unapologetically self-prioritizing I guess

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: “与自我保持一致”这一点很有趣。呃，我试着尽可能委婉地表达这一点。我会说，从我们要共处的这点时间来看，你有一个非常有趣的特质，那就是“整体性自私”（holistic selfishness）。呃，你似乎准备好把自己放在第一位。呃，即使你所说或所做的事情可能会让别人感到有点尴尬，只要对你来说是真实的，你似乎基本上都不受影响。我想这就像是毫不道歉地通过优先考虑自己。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Yeah I think everybody is Uh maybe unapologetic is the part that's that's relatively uh rare but I think everybody puts themselves first That's just human nature You're you're here because you survive You're a separate organism

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 是的，我认为每个人都是这样。呃，也许“毫不道歉”是相对罕见的部分，但我认为每个人都把自己放在第一位。这只是人类的天性。你在这里是因为你生存了下来。你是一个独立的有机体。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I just view it as you're wast everyone's wasting their time on it Um don't do something you don't want to do Why Why are you wasting your time there's so little time on this earth Life goes fast What is it 4,000 weeks That's your lifespan Um and and yes we hear that but we don't remember it But uh I guess I'm keenly aware of how little time I have so I'm just not going to waste it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我只是认为每个人都在这上面浪费时间。呃，不要做你不想做的事。为什么？你为什么要浪费你的时间？在这个地球上的时间太少了。生命过得很快。是多少来着？4000个星期？那是你的寿命。呃，是的，我们听过这个说法，但我们不记得它。但呃，我想我敏锐地意识到了我的时间有多么少，所以我绝不会浪费它。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: How have you got more comfortable at um being the unapologetic self- prioritizer

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你是如何变得更适应这种毫不道歉的自我优先模式的？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: yeah I've gotten I've gotten utterly more and more ruthless on it Ma mainly it's that I see or hear people's freedom and then that liberates me further So I read a uh I read a blog post by uh P Mark aka Mark Andre where he said don't keep a schedule and I took that to heart So I deleted my calendar and I don't keep a schedule I try to remember it all in my head If I can't remember it I'm not going to add I'm glad you got here on time

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 是的，我在这方面变得越来越无情。主要是因为我看到或听到别人的自由，这进一步解放了我。所以我读了一篇博客文章，作者是 P Mark，也就是 Marc Andreessen，他说“不要保留日程表”。我把这话记在心里了。所以我删除了我的日历，我不保留日程表。我试着把所有事情都记在脑子里。如果我记不住，我就不去做。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Yeah exactly Um I hate to look things up at the last minute Mhm Uh so but ironically I don't even know if Mark himself follows that but he made the correct point Uh I read a little story about Jack Dorsey doing all his business off his uh iPhone and iPad and not even going into a Mac and I said "Okay I want to do that." So I'm going to operate through text messaging and not put up my nasty email

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 没错（很高兴我也准时到了）。呃，我讨厌在最后一刻去查事情。呃，具有讽刺意味的是，我甚至不知道 Marc 自己是否还遵守这一点，但他提出的观点是正确的。呃，我还读到一个关于 Jack Dorsey 的小故事，他在 iPhone 和 iPad 上处理所有业务，甚至不用 Mac，我说：“好吧，我也想那样做。”所以我打算通过短信操作，不再去管那该死的电子邮件。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Does that feel like more freedom it does

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 那感觉像是更多的自由吗？

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um so I have a nasty email autoresponder that says "I don't check email and don't text me either." Right If you need to find me you'll find me Obviously some of this is a luxury of success but some of these habits I adopted long before actually the hostile email autoresponder started a long time ago... My wife knows not to ever uh book or schedule me for anything Uh I'm not expect I'm not expected to go to couples dinners I'm not expect to go to birthdays I'm not expect to go to weddings If somebody tries to rope her into having me show up she says he makes his own decisions You got to ask him directly

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，所以我有一个很不客气的电子邮件自动回复，上面写着：“我不查收邮件，也别给我发短信。”对吧。如果你需要找到我，你会找到我的。显然，这在一定程度上是成功的奢侈品，但我早在成功之前就采纳了一些这样的习惯。实际上，那个充满敌意的邮件自动回复很久以前就开始了……我妻子知道永远不要呃，为我预订或安排任何事情。呃，我不被期望去参加情侣晚餐，我不被期望去参加生日派对，我不被期望去参加婚礼。如果有人试图通过她拉我露面，她会说：“他自己做决定，你得直接问他。”

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: What about vice versa well are you not killing serendipity in a way that No no I'm freeing up all my time So my entire life is serendipity I get to interact with whoever I want whenever I want wherever

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 那反过来呢？你这样做不是在某种程度上扼杀了“意外的惊喜”（serendipity）吗？

[Naval Ravikant]: 不不，我是在释放我所有的时间。所以我的整个生活都是意外的惊喜。我可以随时随地和我想要的人互动。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So I'll say "Okay if that thing is interesting I'll see if I can get in that day when I'm in the mood." But there's nothing worse than something coming up that your past self committed you to that your present self doesn't want to do God damn it Past Yeah And then it destroys your entire calendar It destroys your your day because there's like oh this 1 hour slot which is sitting like a turd on my calendar that I have to like schedule my whole day around

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以我会说：“好吧，如果那件事有趣，我会看看那天我有心情的时候能不能去。”但没有什么比这更糟糕的了：你的“过去之我”承诺的事情出现了，而你的“现在之我”却不想做。该死的过去！是的。然后它毁了你的整个日程表，它毁了你的一天。因为就像，噢，这一个小时的时段像一坨屎一样趴在我的日历上，我必须围绕它来安排我的一整天。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: The uh the overscheduled life is not worth living It's not I think it's a terrible way to live life That's not how we evolved It's not how we grew up Um it's not how how we were as children hopefully... Your natural order is freedom Uh I had a friend who uh said to me once you know uh I never want to have to be at a specific place at a specific time And I was like "Oh my god that's freedom." When I heard that that changed my life right there

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，被过度安排的生活不值得过。不值得。我认为那是一种糟糕的生活方式。那不是我们进化的方式，不是我们成长的方式。呃，那不是我们小时候的样子，希望如此……你的自然秩序是自由。呃，我有个朋友曾经对我说，你知道吗，呃，我永远不想被迫在特定的时间出现在特定的地点。我就想：“天哪，那就是自由。”当我听到那句话时，它立刻改变了我的人生。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Just sink a little bit more into that like kind of that fuck you energy that self- prioritizing energy because I think people rationally love the idea of this I'm going to do what only I want to do uh even if they've got the level of freedom it's not fuck you energy in the sense that I think everyone should live their life that way to the greatest extent possible

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 再深入一点谈谈那种……那种“去你妈的”能量（fuck you energy），那种自我优先的能量。因为我认为人们在理性上喜欢这个主意——“我只做我想做的事”——呃，即使他们拥有那种程度的自由。

[Naval Ravikant]: 这不是“去你妈的”能量，我是指每个人都应该在最大程度上那样生活。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Obviously we have our requirements around work and obligations that are genuinely important to us But don't fritter away your life on randomly scheduled things and things that aren't important don't matter and events and weddings and you know tedious dinners with tedious people that you don't want to go to To the extent you can bring freedom into your life optimize for that you'll actually be more productive You won't just be happier and more free You will be more productive because then you can focus on what is in front of you whatever the biggest problem of that day

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 显然，我们有关于工作和对我们真正重要的义务的要求。但不要把你的人生浪费在随机安排的事情上，那些不重要、无所谓的事情上，那些活动、婚礼，以及你知道的，和你不想去的人一起吃的乏味晚餐。在你能将自由带入生活的范围内，为此优化，你实际上会更高效。你不仅会更快乐、更自由，你还会更高效，因为那样你就可以专注于摆在你面前的事情，专注于那一天最大的问题。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: But also another thing that I really believe is that inspiration is perishable Act on it immediately So when you're inspired to do something do that thing If I'm inspired to write a blog post I want to do it at that moment If I'm inspired to send a tweet I want to do it at that moment... If I want to learn something I I do it at the moment of curiosity The moment the curiosity arrives I go learn that thing immediately I download the book I get on Google I get on ChatGpt whatever I will figure that thing out on the spot and that's when the learning happens

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 但还有另一件事我深信不疑，那就是灵感是易逝的。立即行动。当你受到启发去做某事时，就去做那件事。如果我有灵感写一篇博客文章，我想在那一刻就写。如果我有灵感发一条推文，我想在那一刻就发……如果我想学点什么，我就在好奇心产生的时刻去学。好奇心到来的那一刻，我立刻去学那东西。我下载书，我上谷歌，我用 ChatGPT，不管什么，我会当场把它搞清楚，那才是学习发生的时候。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: It doesn't happen because I've scheduled time because I've set an hour aside because when that time arrives I might be in a different mood I might just want to do something different So I think that spontaneity is really important You're going to learn best when you're having fun when you generally are enjoying the process not when you're forced to sit there and do it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 学习不会因为我安排了时间、因为我预留了一个小时而发生。因为当那个时间到来时，我可能是另一种心情，我可能只想做别的事情。所以我认为这种自发性非常重要。当你玩得开心时，当你大体上享受这个过程时，你学得最好，而不是当你被迫坐在那里做这事的时候。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: I reject this frame that efficiency and productivity and success are counter to happiness and freedom They actually go together How so

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 我拒绝这种框架，即效率、生产力和成功是与幸福和自由对立的。它们实际上是相辅相成的。

[Naval Ravikant]: 怎么说？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: the happier you are the more you can sustain doing something the more likely you're going to do something that will in turn make you even happier and you'll continue to do it and you'll outwork everybody else The more free you are the better you can allocate your time and the less you're caught up in a web of obligations and commitments and the more you can focus on the task at hand

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 你越快乐，你就越能维持做某事，你就越可能做那些反过来让你更快乐的事，你会继续做下去，你会比其他任何人都更努力。你越自由，你就越能更好地分配你的时间，你就越少被义务和承诺的网所困住，你就越能专注于手头的任务。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: It's worthwhile to spend time in that exploration before diving into exploitation The biggest mistake in a world with so many choices is premature commitment... And also presumably kill things that aren't working very quickly By default you should kill everything You know if you can't decide the answer is no Uh and most things you should just be saying no to

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 在投入“利用”（exploitation）之前，花时间进行“探索”（exploration）是值得的。在一个选择如此之多的世界里，最大的错误是过早承诺……而且大概也要非常快地扼杀那些行不通的事情。默认情况下，你应该扼杀一切。你知道，如果你无法决定，答案就是“不”。呃，对大多数事情你都应该直接说“不”。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: One of the other things about you know early on in life you're looking for opportunities So you're saying yes to everything And that is a phase that you go through That is the exploration phase Later when you found the thing you want to work on you're in the exploitation phase You have to say no to everything by default And if you don't say no to everything by default if you have to even explicitly go out of your way to say no to something that will take up time

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 另外一件事是，你知道在生命早期，你在寻找机会。所以你对每件事都说“是”。那是你要经历的一个阶段，那是探索阶段。后来当你找到了你想从事的事情，你就进入了利用阶段。你必须默认对每件事说“不”。如果你不默认说“不”，如果你甚至必须特意去对某事说“不”，那都会占用时间。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And one of the things I learned along the way is that if you wouldn't ask somebody else to do it and then you get that request yourself you can just dismiss it You don't have to respond You don't you don't even let let it enter your brain You have to be able to delete emails and text messages without flinching if you want to scale And scaling is very important Scaling your time is really important Every interruption will take you out of flow

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我这一路学到的一件事是，如果你不会要求别人做这件事，而你自己收到了这个请求，你可以直接忽略它。你不必回复。你甚至不应该让它进入你的大脑。如果你想扩大规模（scale），你必须能够毫不犹豫地删除电子邮件和短信。扩大规模非常重要。扩展你的时间非常重要。每一次打扰都会让你从心流中出来。

章节 05：将自己产品化：工作即玩耍

📝 本节摘要：

在本章中，Naval 提出了“将自己产品化”（Productize Yourself）的概念。他认为，要在竞争中获胜，必须利用“真诚”（Authenticity）来逃避竞争，因为没有人能在“做你自己”这件事上击败你。核心在于找到那些对你而言像是玩耍、但在外人看来却是工作的领域。他指出，现代社会提供了无限的机会，允许人们通过不断的探索，找到那个最需要自己独特才华的位置，从而实现从“探索”到“利用”的转变。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: This is related to another insight of yours The less you want something the less you're thinking about it the less you're obsessing over it the more you're going to do it in a natural way the more you're going to do it for yourself you're going to do it in a way that you're good at and you're going to stick with it The people around you will see the quality of your work is higher But this seems like a difficult tension to navigate because an obsessive attention to detail is a competitive advantage of your work as well So you have these two things sort of conflicting with each other

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 这与你的另一个洞见有关：你越不想要某样东西，你越少去想它，越少对它着迷，你就越能以一种自然的方式去做它，你就越能为你自己而做，你会用你擅长的方式去做，并且你会坚持下去。你周围的人会看到你的工作质量更高。但这似乎是一个难以驾驭的张力，因为对细节的过度关注也是你工作的竞争优势。所以你有这两样东西某种程度上在相互冲突。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: No one is going to beat you at being you if it So one of the things I like to say is like find what feels like play to you but looks like work to others So it looks like work to them but to you it feels like play It's not work So you're going to out compete them because you're doing it effortlessly You're doing it for fun They're doing it for work They're doing it for some byproduct To you it's art It's beauty It's joy It's it's flow It's fulfilling

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 没有人能在“做你自己”这件事上击败你。所以我喜欢说的一句话是：找到那些对你感觉像玩耍，但在别人看来像工作的事情。所以在他们看来那是工作，但对你来说那是玩耍，那不是工作。所以你会胜过他们，因为你做起来毫不费力。你是为了乐趣而做，他们是为了工作而做，他们是为了某种副产品而做。对你来说，它是艺术，它是美，它是快乐，它是心流，它是充实的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh you must enjoy podcasting If you didn't you wouldn't be good at it You would either right if you would you if if you decided that the right way to get ahead in life was to go write books you would nobody would have heard of you Chris Williamson's book would be a complete flop That's not who you are You're a podcaster You enjoy talking to people You enjoy interviewing them The more you do things that are natural to you the less competition you have You escape competition through authenticity by being your own self

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，你肯定很享受做播客。如果你不享受，你就不会做得这么好。如果你……如果你认为出人头地的正确方式是去写书，那你可能……没人会听说过你。Chris Williamson 的书可能会彻底失败。那不是你。你是个播客主。你喜欢和人交谈，你喜欢采访他们。你越做那些对你来说自然的事情，你的竞争就越少。你通过真诚，通过做你自己来逃避竞争。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: If I had to summarize how to be successful in life in two words I would just say productize yourself That's it Just figure out what it is that you naturally do that the world might want that you can scale up and turn into a product and it'll be it'll eventually be effortless for you Yes there's always work required but it won't even feel like work to you It'll feel like play to you

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 如果要我用两个词来总结如何在生活中取得成功，我会说：“将自己产品化”（Productize Yourself）。就是这样。只需找出那些你天生就会做、世界可能需要、并且你可以通过规模化将其转化为产品的事情。最终这对你来说会是毫不费力的。是的，总是需要工作的，但它对你来说甚至感觉不到像是在工作。对你来说它感觉就像玩耍。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And modern society gives us that opportunity You know if you were 2,000 years ago you're born in a farm Your choices are very limited right you're going to do stuff on that farm Now you can literally wake up and you can move to a different city You can switch careers You can switch jobs You can change the people that you're with Uh you know you can change so many things about who you are and who you're with and what you're doing that there is infinite opportunity out there for you Literally infinite

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 而现代社会给了我们这个机会。你知道，如果你是在2000年前，你出生在一个农场，你的选择非常有限，对吧，你只能在那个农场里干活。现在，你可以真的醒来然后搬到一个不同的城市。你可以转行，你可以换工作，你可以改变和你在一起的人。呃，你知道你可以改变很多关于你是谁、你和谁在一起以及你在做什么的事情，外面有无限的机会等着你。真的是无限的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And so it's much better to treat this like a search function to find the people who need you the most to find the work that needs you the most to find the place you're best suited to be at

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以最好把这看作一个“搜索函数”（search function），去寻找最需要你的人，去寻找最需要你的工作，去寻找最适合你的地方。

章节 06：决策的减法：学会拒绝与在这个世界扩大规模

📝 本节摘要：

本章重点讲述了如何在“探索”与“利用”的人生阶段中切换策略。Naval 指出，在选择过剩的现代世界，“过早承诺”是最大的错误。当人处于“利用阶段”时，必须默认对所有事情说“不”，以保护自己的时间资产。他分享了一个处理请求的实用法则：如果你自己不会向别人提出某种请求，那么当你收到这类请求时，可以直接忽略。他强调，为了实现规模化（Scaling）并维持心流状态，必须学会毫不犹豫地删除干扰信息。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And it's worthwhile to spend time in that exploration before diving into exploitation The biggest mistake in a world with so many choices is premature commitment If you prematurely commit to being a lawyer or a doctor and now you've got like you know 5 years invested into that you might have just completely missed You might just end up in the wrong profession the wrong place or the wrong people for 30 years of your life grinding away And yes the best time to figure that out was before but the second best time is now So just change it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 在投入“利用”（exploitation）之前，花时间进行“探索”（exploration）是值得的。在一个选择如此之多的世界里，最大的错误是过早承诺（premature commitment）。如果你过早承诺成为一名律师或医生，而现在你已经投入了5年时间，你可能完全错过了（其他机会）。你可能最终会在错误的职业、错误的地点或与错误的人一起消磨30年的生命。是的，搞清楚这一点的最佳时机是以前，但第二好的时机就是现在。所以，改变它吧。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And also presumably kill things that aren't working very quickly By default you should kill everything You know if you can't decide the answer is no Uh and most things you should just be saying no to The part of my keeping my calendar free is just by default saying no to everything Do I want to create a calendar just to add your event right or to add your need or your desire

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 而且大概也要非常快地扼杀那些行不通的事情。默认情况下，你应该扼杀一切。你知道，如果你无法决定，答案就是“不”。呃，对大多数事情你都应该直接说“不”。我保持日程表空白的部分原因就是默认对一切说“不”。我难道想创建一个日历仅仅是为了添加你的活动吗？对吧，或者添加你的需求或你的欲望？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: One of the other things about you know early on in life you're looking for opportunities So you're saying yes to everything And that is a phase that you go through That is the exploration phase Later when you found the thing you want to work on you're in the exploitation phase You have to say no to everything by default And if you don't say no to everything by default if you have to even explicitly go out of your way to say no to something that will take up time

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 关于这一点还有另一件事，你知道在生命早期，你在寻找机会。所以你对每件事都说“是”。那是你要经历的一个阶段，那是探索阶段。后来当你找到了你想从事的事情，你就进入了利用阶段。你必须默认对每件事说“不”。如果你不默认说“不”，如果你甚至必须特意去对某事说“不”，那都会占用时间。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh for example you know there there are a lot of people out there who are into hustle culture and and a big piece of hustle culture is like well you're not going to get something if you don't ask for it So they'll hustle people They'll always be sending you requests messages Yeah this is a famous person problem but I have it And people are always asking me for things And I kind of squirm when I get these messages and I'm sure you get these two text messages emails saying "Hey Chris my friend so and so should really be on your podcast or you should come to my event You should write a forward for my book." And you kind of squirm when you get this right you have to figure out how to say no

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，例如，你知道外面有很多人热衷于“奋斗文化”（hustle culture），而奋斗文化的一个重要部分就是：如果你不开口要，你就得不到。所以他们会去骚扰（hustle）别人。他们总是给你发送请求信息。是的，这是个名人的问题，但我确实遇到了。人们总是向我索要东西。当我收到这些信息时，我有点坐立难安。我确信你也收到过这样的短信或邮件，说：“嘿 Chris，我的某某朋友真的应该上你的播客，或者你应该来参加我的活动，你应该为我的书写序。”当你收到这些时你会感到尴尬，对吧，你得想办法怎么拒绝。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And one of the things I learned along the way is that if you wouldn't ask somebody else to do it and then you get that request yourself you can just dismiss it You don't have to respond You don't you don't even let let it enter your brain You have to be able to delete emails and text messages without flinching if you want to scale And scaling is very important Scaling your time is really important Every interruption will take you out of flow

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我这一路学到的一件事是：如果你自己不会要求别人做这件事，而你自己收到了这个请求，你可以直接忽略它。你不必回复。你甚至不应该让它进入你的大脑。如果你想扩大规模（scale），你必须能够毫不犹豫地删除电子邮件和短信。扩大规模非常重要。扩展你的时间非常重要。每一次打扰都会让你从心流（flow）中出来。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So the only way you can remain in flow is if you get either very good at ignoring these things by default or closing yourself off like a hermit like our mutual friend Tim Ferris does or you just become emotionally capable of not registering these as something that causes turbulence inside of you That not registering it emotionally thing is that uh it's fundamental That's so fundamental to so many things in life

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以你能保持在心流中的唯一方法，要么是你非常擅长默认忽略这些事情；要么是你像我们共同的朋友 Tim Ferriss 那样像隐士一样把自己封闭起来；要么你就在情感上变得有能力不把这些事情注册为引起内心动荡的东西。那种“不在情感上注册它”的能力，呃，它是根本性的。这对生活中的很多事情来说都是根本性的。

章节 07：对抗本能：悲观主义是进化的遗存

📝 本节摘要：

本章深入探讨了悲观主义的生物学根源与现代适应性。Naval 指出，悲观主义是进化的产物，旨在帮助人类在丛林中避免“毁灭风险”（如被捕食）。然而在现代社会，这种本能已不再适用，因为现代社会的失败成本极低，而通过杠杆获得的回报却是“非线性”且无限的。他提出了“杠铃策略”（Barbell Strategy）：在具体事物上保持怀疑（避免盲目），但在宏观层面保持乐观（相信总会有出路）。最后，他警告不要被“悲观主义者”或“内向者”等标签自我设限，应摘除有色眼镜，客观地看待不断变化的现实。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: don't partner with cynics and pessimists You mentioned there about uh the people who've got a nightmare going on at home and are trying to fix the world But a lot of the time that cynicism and pessimism we find in ourselves We see the world whether we want to whether it's because we've embied what the news or or the negative people around us have said or it's a bit more kind of endogenous than that It's just sort of in us It's the way that we see the world How can people avoid cynicism and pessimism within themselves

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: “不要与愤世嫉俗者和悲观主义者合作。”你刚才提到那些家里一团糟却试图拯救世界的人。但很多时候，我们在自己身上也能发现这种愤世嫉俗和悲观主义。无论我们是否愿意，我们通过它看世界，也许是因为我们吸收了新闻或周围消极人群的言论，或者它更多是一种内源性的东西。它就在我们体内，是我们看世界的方式。人们如何才能避免自己内心的愤世嫉俗和悲观主义？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: yeah Synism and pessimism is a tough one It's we're naturally hardwired for it Again I go back to evolution I I'm sorry to keep harping on evolution but within biology there's very few good explanatory theories And you know theory of evolution by natural selection is probably the best one So if you can't explain something about life or psychology or human nature through evolution then you probably don't have a good theory for it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 是的，愤世嫉俗和悲观主义是个棘手的问题。我们天生就被硬编码为这样。再一次，我要回到进化论。很抱歉我一直喋喋不休地谈论进化，但在生物学中，好的解释性理论很少。你知道，自然选择的进化论可能是最好的一个。所以如果你不能通过进化论来解释关于生命、心理学或人性的某些东西，那你可能就没有一个好的理论。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And I would say that pessimism is another one that comes out of this which is in the natural environment you're hardwired to be pessimistic Because let's say that I see something rustling in the woods and if I move towards it and it turns out to be food and prey then good I get to eat one meal but if it turns out to be a predator I get eaten and that's the end of that So we are hardwired to avoid ruin um and and uh you know just dying So we are naturally hardwired to be pessimists

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我会说悲观主义也是由此而来的。在自然环境中，你被硬编码为悲观的。因为假设我看到树林里有东西在沙沙作响，如果我走向它，结果发现是食物或猎物，那很好，我可以吃一顿；但如果结果发现是捕食者，我就被吃了，那就全完了。所以我们被硬编码为避免毁灭，呃，以及你知道的，死亡。所以我们天生就是悲观主义者。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: but modern society is very different despite whatever problems you may have with modern society It is far far safer than living in the jungle and just trying to survive uh and the opportunities on the upside are nonlinear For example when you're investing if you short a stock you the most money you can make is 2x You just lose you know if the stock goes to zero you double your money But if the stock is the next Nvidia and it goes 100x or a,000x you make a lot of money So upside through because of leverage is nearly unlimited

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 但现代社会非常不同，不管你对现代社会有什么不满。它远比生活在丛林里仅仅为了生存要安全得多。而且，上行空间的机会是非线性的。例如，当你投资时，如果你做空一只股票，你最多只能赚2倍。你知道，如果股票归零，你的钱翻倍。但如果这只股票是下一个英伟达，它涨了100倍或1000倍，你会赚很多钱。所以由于杠杆作用，上行空间几乎是无限的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh also in modern society because there's so many different people you can interact with if you go on a date and it fails there are infinite more people to go on a date with In a tribal system there might have been 20 people and you can't even get through all of them So modern society is far more forgiving of failure And you just have to sort of neoccortically realize and override that You have to realize that you're much more running a search function to find the thing that'll work And then that one thing will pay off in massive compounding

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，而且在现代社会，因为你可以与这么多不同的人互动，如果你去约会失败了，还有无数其他人可以约会。在部落系统中，可能只有20个人，你甚至无法接触完他们。所以现代社会对失败要宽容得多。你只需要用你的新皮层（理性大脑）去意识到并覆盖这种本能。你必须意识到，你更多的是在运行一个“搜索函数”来寻找那个有效的东西。然后那个东西会带来巨大的复利回报。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Once you find your mate for the rest of your life you find your wife or your husband then you can compound in that relationship It's okay if you had 50 failed dates in between The same way once you find the one business you're meant to plow into and it'll compound returns It's okay if you had 50 small failed ventures or 50 small failed job interviews It doesn't the number of failures doesn't matter And so there's no point in being a pessimist It's you want to be an optimist

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 一旦你找到了共度余生的伴侣，找到了你的妻子或丈夫，你就可以在那段关系中积累复利。中间有50次失败的约会也没关系。同样，一旦你找到了那个你注定要投入并在其中获得复利回报的企业，即使你有50次小的失败创业或50次失败的求职面试也没关系。失败的次数并不重要。所以做一个悲观主义者没有任何意义。你要做一个乐观主义者。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: But I would say you want to be you want to be skeptical about specific things Every specific opportunity is probably a fail But you want to be optimistic in the general In the general you want to be like something in here is going to work out

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 但我会说，你要对具体的事情持怀疑态度。每一个具体的机会都很可能会失败。但在宏观上（in the general），你要保持乐观。在宏观上，你要相信这里面总会有一样东西能成。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: How do you navigate that tension

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你如何驾驭这种张力？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: i mean exactly as I said I'm optimistic in the general that if something fails right now then this is a little woowoo but it wasn't meant to be It was a learning experience It was an iteration As long as I learned something from it then it's a win If I didn't learn from it then it's a loss But as long as you're learning and you keep iterating fast and cutting your losses quickly then when you find the right thing you have to be optimistic and compound into it So you don't want to jump into the first thing And you don't want to marry the first person you date necessarily unless you got very lucky Um but you you want to investigate and explore very very quickly until you find the match And then you have to be willing to go all in You have to be willing to move your chips to the center of the table So both those uh both those uh approaches are required So it's a barbell strategy It's sort of black or it's white And most people are sort of stuck in this gray bit And I'm like half in but I'm kind of don't really know if I am

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我的意思是，就像我刚才说的。我在宏观上是乐观的，如果现在某件事失败了——这听起来有点玄乎——那是它注定不该发生。这是一次学习经历，是一次迭代。只要我从中有所学，那就是赢。如果我没学到东西，那就是输。但只要你在学习，并且保持快速迭代、快速止损，那么当你找到对的事情时，你必须乐观并全力投入其中进行复利积累。所以你不想跳进第一件事里，你也不想和你约会的第一个人结婚，除非你非常幸运。呃，但你要非常非常快地调查和探索，直到找到匹配的对象。然后你必须愿意全押（go all in）。你必须愿意把你所有的筹码推到桌子中央。所以这两种呃，这两种方法都是必需的。这是一个“杠铃策略”（barbell strategy）。它是非黑即白的。而大多数人被困在这个灰色地带，像是“我进了一半，但我不太确定我是否真的在里面”。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I also think like labels like pessimist optimist cynic introvert extrovert these are very self-limiting Humans are very dynamic There are times when you feel like being introverted There are times when you feel like being extroverted There are contexts in which you'll be pessimistic There are contexts in which you'll be optimistic Leave all those labels alone It's better just to look at the problem at hand Look at reality the way it is Try to take yourself out of the equation in a in a sense Like obviously you're involved but motivated reasoning is the worst kind of reasoning Uh you're not going to find truth through highly motivated reasoning You have to be objective And objective means trying to take yourself out of it as much as possible or at least your personality out of it as much as possible

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我还认为像悲观主义者、乐观主义者、愤世嫉俗者、内向者、外向者这样的标签，是非常自我设限的。人类是非常动态的。有时你会想内向，有时你会想外向。在某些语境下你会悲观，在某些语境下你会乐观。把那些标签都扔掉吧。最好只看手头的问题，看现实本来的样子。在某种意义上，试着把自己从等式中拿掉。显然你身在其中，但“动机性推理”（motivated reasoning，先有结论再找理由）是最糟糕的推理。呃，你不可能通过高度动机性的推理找到真理。你必须客观。而客观意味着尽可能把自己拿掉，或者至少尽可能把你的个性（personality）拿掉。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And so to the extent you run with this thick identity and personality it's going to cloud your judgment It's going to try and lock you into the past If you say "I'm a depressed unhappy person Yeah I'm going to be unhappy." That's a way of locking yourself into your past even saying "I have trauma I have PTSD." Yeah you you feel something There are memories There are flashes There are occasional bad feelings But don't define yourself by it because then you'll lock it into your identity and you're just going to loop on it It's better to stay flexible because reality is always changing and you have to be able to adapt to it Adaptation is also intelligence Adaptation is survival Adaptation is kind of how you're here You're here because you're an adapter and your ancestors were adapters So to adapt you will be able to see things clearly And if you're seeing them through your own identity it's going to cloud your judgment

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以如果你带着这种厚重的身份和个性运行，它会蒙蔽你的判断。它会试图把你锁在过去。如果你说“我是一个抑郁、不快乐的人，是的，我会不快乐”，那是一种把自己锁在过去的方式。甚至说“我有创伤，我有 PTSD”。是的，你感觉到了什么，有记忆，有闪回，偶尔有糟糕的感觉。但不要用它来定义你自己，因为那样你就会把它锁进你的身份里，你会一直在里面循环。最好保持灵活，因为现实总是在变化，你必须能够适应它。适应也是智慧。适应就是生存。适应某种程度上就是你为什么会在这里的原因。你在这里是因为你是一个适应者，你的祖先也是适应者。所以为了适应，你必须能够清晰地看事情。如果你透过你自己的身份看事情，那会蒙蔽你的判断。

章节 08：幸福的定义：在平静与惊喜之间

📝 本节摘要：

在这一章中，Naval 重新定义了幸福：它不仅仅是快乐，更是“对现状的接纳”和“没有任何缺失感”。他指出，虽然人们声称追求幸福，但如果给他们一台能让人永恒快乐的“极乐机器”，大多数人会拒绝，因为他们真正渴望的是意义、奋斗和惊喜。他将生活比作一条河流，流动在“焦虑”（完全的不可预测）和“无聊”（完全的可预测）两岸之间，而生活的艺术就在于在这两者之间找到平衡。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Moving on to sort of thinking about happiness Obviously a topic of yours that's a it's honestly the one that I feel least qualified to talk about Is it like a guy that's got long arms teaching you how to bench press or a dude that's really tall teaching you how to deadlift someone that feels like they came from behind the eightball Yeah Is you're you're asking a crazy person about their thoughts So just thought it through Is happiness still more about peace than it is about joy

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 接着来思考一下幸福。显然这是你的话题，老实说也是我觉得自己最没资格谈论的话题。这就像一个长臂猿教你怎么做卧推，或者一个高个子教你怎么做硬拉，感觉就像是一个处于劣势的人在教导。是的，你是在问一个疯子他的想法。所以想问一下，幸福更多的是关于平静，还是关于快乐（joy）？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: it's just one of those overloaded words that means different things to different people So I'm not even sure we're communicating the same language But uh what is happiness i think it's just basically being okay with where you are Not wanting not wanting things to be different than the way they are Not having the sense that anything is missing in this moment Needing something to change Your current positive situation being contingent on an adjustment on getting something from the outside world Ironically I think most people if you were to ask them when they were happiest for a sustained period of time not for a brief moment because pleasure can override happiness and create kind of this illusion of happiness But if you ask people when they were happy for a sustained period of time they were probably doing some variation of nothing

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 这是一个被过度使用的词，对不同的人意味着不同的东西。所以我甚至不确定我们是否在用同一种语言交流。但呃，什么是幸福？我认为它基本上就是对你现在的状态感到“可以”（being okay）。不想要、不希望事情变得与现在不同。在这一刻没有缺失感。不需要改变什么。你当前的积极状况不取决于某种调整，也不取决于从外部世界获得什么。讽刺的是，我认为如果你问大多数人，他们在哪段时间持续感到最幸福——不是短暂的时刻，因为快感（pleasure）可以覆盖幸福并制造这种幸福的幻觉——但如果你问人们什么时候持续感到幸福，他们可能当时正在做某种形式的“无所事事”。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: That's interesting because in the chase is this sort of lack this contingency

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 这很有趣，因为在“追逐”中隐含着某种缺失，这种偶然性（contingency）。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: That's right But then you get bored If you just sit around all the time you get bored So you want adventure you want surprise Like there's a funny thought experiment of the bliss machine right which is suppose I could drill a hole in your head and put electrode in And they did this with monkeys and I can put a wire in there and I can stimulate just the right part of your brain and I can put you in bliss and you'll just be in bliss Would you would you want that would that be nice for how long do it and I'll tell you Right So most people will say "Well I don't want that I want meaning I don't want just bliss I want meaning."

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 没错。但那样你会感到无聊。如果你一直坐着没事干，你会无聊。所以你想要冒险，你想要惊喜。就像有一个关于“极乐机器”（bliss machine）的有趣思想实验，对吧？假设我可以在你头上钻个孔，放个电极进去——他们对猴子做过这实验——我可以放根线进去，刺激你大脑恰当的部位，让你处于极乐状态，你就一直爽。你会想要那样吗？那会很棒吗？做多久？我会告诉你。对吧，所以大多数人会说：“嗯，我不想要那个，我想要意义。我不只是想要极乐，我想要意义。”

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And you're like "Okay well I'll put an electrode in there and I'll give you meaning How about that?" And if you kind of run this thought experiment long enough I think most people realize actually what I want is I want surprise I want and I want the world to surprise me and I want to wrestle with it in ways that are somewhat predictable but somewhat not And you kind of end up back where you started So I I don't know if necessarily for some people Pure happiness is the ultimate goal They want to you know just be blissfully happy wherever they are whenever they are But I think other people most people would say well I'm here in this world I'm here in this life I don't understand it or why but I want to be I want to be engaged I want to be surprised I want to do things I want to accomplish things I want to want things and then get them Right that's kind of the whole game that we're all playing here

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 然后你会说：“好吧，那我在里面放个电极，给你‘意义’感，怎么样？”如果你把这个思想实验进行得足够久，我认为大多数人会意识到，实际上我想要的是惊喜。我想要世界给我惊喜，我想要以一种既有些可预测又有些不可预测的方式与世界搏斗。然后你某种程度上又回到了原点。所以我不知道纯粹的幸福是否必然是某些人的终极目标。他们想要无论何时何地都极度快乐。但我认为其他人，大多数人会说，嗯，我身处这个世界，我身处这个人生，我不明白这是什么或为什么，但我想要参与其中。我想要被惊喜，我想要做事，我想要成就事情，我想要渴望东西然后得到它们。对吧，这有点像我们都在玩的整个游戏。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Surprises are really interesting the sort of unpredictability I think total bro science here but I'm pretty sure that that's kind of how dopamine works That things are a bit better than you expected That within that it means that if you for the perennial insecure overachievers that uh cloy for control that really want to be able to the schedule is perfectly done and we know the itinerary we know where we're going to be at this time you're in some ways I guess reducing down the capacity for surprise because everything has become uh very contrived prescribed done in advance laid out your ability to be surprised actually diminishes

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 惊喜真的很有趣，那种不可预测性。我想这里全是“兄弟科学”（bro science），但我很确定那就是多巴胺的工作原理：事情比你预期的要好一点。这意味着，对于那些长期缺乏安全感、过度追求成就、渴望控制权的人来说——他们真的希望日程表完美无缺，我们知道行程，我们知道这个时候要在哪里——在某种程度上，我想你是在降低惊喜的能力，因为一切都变得非常刻意、规定好、预先完成、铺陈好了。你被惊喜的能力实际上在减弱。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Yeah If if nothing worked out the way you expected if it was all serendipity and you didn't want that you would just be a ball of anxiety On the other hand if everything worked out as you expected and wanted you'd be so bored you might as well be dead So there's some you know the the river of life kind of flows between these two banks and enjoy it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 是的。如果什么事情都不按你的预期发展，如果全是意外（serendipity）而你不想要那样，你就会变成一团焦虑。另一方面，如果所有事情都按你的预期和意愿发展，你会无聊得要死，跟死了没两样。所以，你知道，生命之河就在这两岸之间流淌，享受它吧。

章节 09：焦虑的解药：直面死亡与活在当下

📝 本节摘要：

在本章中，Naval 区分了“压力”与“焦虑”：压力源于内心两个相互冲突的欲望（如想自私又想被喜欢），而焦虑则是未解决的压力堆积而成的“垃圾山”。他提出，化解焦虑的终极手段是沉思死亡——意识到一切终将归零，当下的烦恼便显得微不足道。Naval 重新定义了“浪费时间”：那不是指未能产出，而是指未能活在当下。最后，他指出我们不应追求“心之平静”（peace of mind，仿佛心是敌人），而应追求“为心寻找平静”（peace for our mind），即依托于那个永恒不变的觉知（Consciousness）背景，而非瞬息万变的思维。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: You mentioned anxiety before Uh imagine how effective you'd be if you weren't anxious all the time is is one of yours and anxiety is the emotion dour of the 21st century and lots of driven people very anxious very paranoid that's what's caused them to be affected They pay so much attention detail oriented not letting things go staying up at night thinking about it That's the paranoia coming in What have you come to learn about anxiety and dealing with it

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你之前提到了焦虑。呃，“想象一下如果你不总是焦虑，你会多有效率”，这是你的名言之一。焦虑是21世纪的流行情绪，很多有驱动力的人非常焦虑，非常偏执，这也是导致他们受影响的原因。他们太过关注细节，不肯放手，彻夜难眠地思考。那就是偏执在作祟。关于焦虑及其应对，你学到了什么？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: so anxiety and stress are interesting They're very related Stress is when uh like if you look at an iron beam when an iron beam is under stress it's cuz it's being bent in two different directions at the same time So when your mind is under stress it's because it has two conflicting desires at once So for example you know you you want to be liked but you want to do something selfish and you can't reconcile the two and so you're under stress uh you want to do something for somebody else you want to do something for yourself right these aream you you don't want to go to work but you want to make money so you're under stress right so you have two conflicting desires

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 焦虑和压力很有趣，它们非常相关。压力是……比如你看一根铁梁，当铁梁承受压力时，是因为它同时向两个不同的方向弯曲。所以当你的头脑承受压力时，是因为它同时有两个相互冲突的欲望。举个例子，你知道，你想被喜欢，但你又想做一些自私的事，你无法调和这两者，所以你感到了压力。呃，你想为别人做事，又想为自己做事，对吧？或者你不想去工作，但你想赚钱，所以你有压力。对吧，因为你有两个相互冲突的欲望。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: and I think one of the ways to get through stress is to acknowledge that oh I actually have two conflicting desires and either I need to resolve it I need to pick one and then be okay losing the other or I will decide later but at least just being aware of why you're stress can help alleviate a lot of stress and then anxiety I think is sort of this pervasive unidentifiable able stress where you're just kind of stressed out all the time and you're not even sure why and you can't even identify the underlying problem

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我认为克服压力的方法之一是承认：噢，我实际上有两个相互冲突的欲望。要么我需要解决它——我需要选一个，然后坦然接受失去另一个；要么我以后再决定。但至少意识到你为什么感到压力，就能缓解很多压力。然后焦虑，我认为是一种普遍的、无法识别的压力。你只是时刻感到压力很大，但你甚至不确定为什么，你甚至无法识别潜在的问题。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I think the reason for that is because you you have so many uh unresolved problems unresolved stress points that have piled up in your life that you can no longer identify what the problems are and there's this mountain of garbage in your mind and it's a little bit of it poking out the top like an iceberg and that's anxiety But underneath there's a lot of unresolved things And so you just need to kind of go through very carefully every time you're anxious Like okay why am I anxious this time i don't know why Oh well let me sit here and just think about it Let me let me write down what the possible causes could be Let me meditate on it Let me journal Let me talk to a therapist Let me talk to my friends Let me just kind of see like when does that stress go away if you can kind of identify and unravel and resolve these issues then I think that helps get rid of anxiety

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我认为原因在于你有太多呃未解决的问题、未解决的压力点堆积在你的生活中，以至于你再也无法识别问题是什么了。你的脑子里有一座垃圾山，只有一点点像冰山一样露在外面，那就是焦虑。但在下面有很多未解决的事情。所以你只需要在每次焦虑时非常仔细地梳理。比如，好吧，这次我为什么焦虑？我不知道为什么。噢，好吧，让我坐在这里想一想。让我把可能的原因写下来。让我冥想一下，写写日记，和治疗师谈谈，和朋友谈谈。让我看看压力什么时候会消失。如果你能识别、解开并解决这些问题，我认为那有助于摆脱焦虑。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: uh a lot of the anxiety is piled up because we move through life too quickly not observing our own reactions to things We don't resolve them So this goes counter to what I was saying earlier about not reflecting too much on things but you reflect on the problems to observe them and solve them You don't reflect on them to feel better about yourself to indulge them Well if if if you're doing it to just feel better about yourself that could be strengthening your personality and your ego and could be creating a more fragile personality

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，很多焦虑是因为我们生活得太快，没有观察我们自己对事物的反应而堆积起来的。我们没有解决它们。所以这与我之前说的“不要过度反思”是相反的，但你反思问题是为了观察它们并解决它们。你反思并不是为了让自己感觉更好，或者沉溺其中。如果你这样做只是为了让自己感觉更好，那可能会加强你的个性和小我（ego），并可能造就一个更脆弱的个性。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um you know one one big anxiety resolver for me is just ruminating on death I think that's a good one You're going to die It's all going to zero You cannot take anything with you And I know this is trit And I know the the we don't spend enough time thinking about the big questions We kind of give up on them when we're very very young... But I think the big questions are the big questions for good reasons And uh if you can keep the idea in front of you at all times that you're going to die and that everything goes literally to zero What's there to stress about

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，你知道，对我来说一个很大的焦虑化解法就是沉思死亡。我觉得这很有效。你会死的。一切都会归零。你什么也带不走。我知道这是老生常谈。我知道我们没有花足够的时间思考这些大问题。我们在非常非常年轻的时候就放弃了它们……但我认为大问题之所以是大问题是有充分理由的。呃，如果你能时刻把这个念头放在面前——你会死，一切真的都会归零——那还有什么好压力的呢？

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: yeah For better or worse life is very short How should people deal with its briefness enjoy it Make the best of it You know it's it's even briefer than that Each moment just disappears it's gone There's only a present moment and it's gone instantly So if you're not if you're not there for it if you're stressed out or you're anxious or you're thinking about something else you missed it So you're any moment when you're not in that moment you are dead to that moment You might as well be dead because your mind is off doing something else or you know living in some imagined reality that is just a very poor substitute for the actual reality

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 是的，无论好坏，生命都很短暂。人们应该如何应对这种短暂？

[Naval Ravikant]: 享受它。充分利用它。你知道，它甚至比那更短暂。每一刻都在消失，它过去了。只有当下这一刻，而且瞬间即逝。所以如果你不在那里，如果你压力很大，或者你很焦虑，或者你在想别的事情，你就错过了它。所以在任何一刻，如果你不在那一刻里，你对那一刻来说就是死的。你还不如死了算了，因为你的心跑到别的地方去做事了，或者你知道，生活在某种想象的现实中，而那只是真实这一刻的拙劣替代品。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So one of my recent realizations was what is wasted time what is a what is a waste of time so I don't like to waste time but what is wasted time and everything is wasted time in a sense because nothing matters in the ultimate Uh but in each moment the thing matters In each moment it's the only thing that matters Actually the what's happening in front of you is literally has all the meaning in the world And so what matters is just being present for the thing

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以我最近的一个领悟是：什么是浪费时间？什么算是浪费时间？我不喜欢浪费时间，但什么是浪费时间？在某种意义上，一切都是浪费时间，因为最终没有什么重要。呃，但在每一刻，事情是重要的。在每一刻，它是唯一重要的事情。实际上，发生在你面前的事真的拥有世界上所有的意义。所以重要的只是对那件事保持“在场”（being present）。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So if you're doing something that you want to do and you're fully there for it then it's not wasted time If you don't want to do it and your mind is running away from it and you're reacting against it and you're wishing you were somewhere else and you're thinking about some other thing or you're anticipating some future thing or regretting some past thing or being fearful of something then that's wasted time That's time that's being wasted when you're not actually present for the reality in front of you

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以如果你正在做你想做的事，并且你全身心投入其中，那就不是浪费时间。如果你不想做这件事，你的心在逃避它，你在抗拒它，你希望自己在别的地方，你在想别的事情，或者你在期待未来的某件事，或者后悔过去某件事，或者害怕某件事，那就是浪费时间。那是被浪费的时间，因为你并没有真正活在面前的现实中。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So the true wasted time is a time that you're not present for when you are not there for it When you're not doing the thing you want to do to the best of your capability such that you're immersed in it If you're not immersed in this moment then you're wasting your time

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以真正浪费的时间是你不在场的时间，是你不在那里的时间。当你没有尽你所能去做你想做的事，没有沉浸其中时。如果你没有沉浸在这一刻，那你就是在浪费你的时间。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: People get worried about dying and no longer being here but they don't realize that so much of their life is spent not being here in any case

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 人们担心死亡，担心不再存在于此，但他们没意识到，无论如何，他们生命中的大部分时间其实并没有“在这里”。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: That's right But and I think people crave being here for it And and and when you're here for it you're actually not thinking about yourself You are more immersed in the thing the the moment the task at hand

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 没错。但我认为人们渴望在这里。而且，当你在这里时，你实际上并没有在想你自己。你更多是沉浸在那件事、那一刻、手头的任务中。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: We don't want peace of mind We want peace for our mind

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 我们不想要“心之平静”（peace of mind），我们想要“为心寻找平静”（peace for our mind）。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: That's right Yeah You don't peace The mind is what can eat you alive if you let it And there's more to you than the mind How so well I mean the very I don't want to disassemble the body so to speak right because please go on Yeah At the end of the day like everything arises within your consciousness right you you got nowhere else to experience it Sorry You've got nowhere else to experience Nowhere else to experience it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 没错，是的。你不要平静……如果你放任不管，头脑（mind）会把你活活吃掉。而你不止是头脑。

[Chris Williamson]: 怎么说？

[Naval Ravikant]: 嗯，我的意思是，我不想拆解身体……

[Chris Williamson]: 请继续。

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的。归根结底，一切都在你的意识（consciousness）中升起，对吧？你没有别的地方去体验它。

[Chris Williamson]: 抱歉？

[Naval Ravikant]: 你没有别的地方去体验。

[Chris Williamson]: 没有别的地方去体验它。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And that consciousness is uh relatively static in the sense that it's been exactly the same from the moment you were born to the moment you die And everything that you experience from your body from your mind to the world to to everything is within that consciousness Uh and that thing that base layer of being and this is what the Buddhists will tell you is the real thing Everything that comes and goes in the middle including your mind including your body is unreal And trying to find stability in those transient things is is your castle that you're building on sand that's going to crumble

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 那个意识是相对静止的，从你出生到你死去的那一刻，它完全是一样的。你体验到的一切——从你的身体、你的头脑到世界，再到一切——都在那个意识之中。呃，那个东西，那个存在的基础层（base layer of being）……这就是佛教徒会告诉你的“真实的东西”。中间来来去去的一切，包括你的头脑，包括你的身体，都是不真实的。试图在这些短暂的事物中寻找稳定性，就像是在沙滩上建城堡，它终将崩塌。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Life is going to play out the way it's going to play out There will be some good and some bad Most of it is actually just up to your interpretation You're born you have a set of sensory experiences and then you die How you choose to interpret those experiences is up to you And different people interpret them in different ways

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 生命会按它的方式展开。会有好的，也会有坏的。大部分实际上取决于你的解读。你出生，你有一套感官体验，然后你死去。你选择如何解读这些体验取决于你。不同的人用不同的方式解读。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Yeah The old line about two people walking down the street They're having the exact same experience One is h experience One is happy one is sad right it's a narrative in their heads It's how they choose to interpret Um so I think when I said that it was a long time ago I was talking more about having positive interpretations and negative interpretations But these days I think it's better just not to have any interpretations and to just allow things to be You're still going to have interpretations You can't stop it Uh and nor should you try But even that having an interpretation is just a thing you can leave alone

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 是的。那句老话：两个人走在街上，他们有着完全相同的经历，一个快乐，一个悲伤。对吧，那是他们脑中的叙事。那是他们选择解读的方式。

[Naval Ravikant]: 呃，所以我想虽然那是我很久以前说的——那时我更多是在谈论要有积极的解读而不是消极的解读——但这些天我认为最好是没有任何解读，只是允许事情如其所是。你仍然会有解读，你无法停止它，呃，你也不应该尝试停止。但即使是“拥有一个解读”这件事，也是你可以不去管它的东西。

章节 10：直觉与关系：如何选择伴侣与生活

📝 本节摘要：

本章聚焦于人生中的重大决策与人际关系。Naval 提出，在面对艰难决定时，应依赖经过进化与经验打磨的“直觉”（Gut），而非仅仅是大脑的理性分析。他强调我们无法改变他人，只能通过真诚的赞美来强化期望的行为。在伴侣选择上，他警告不要爱上对方的“潜力”或“简历”，而应追求灵魂层面的“统一感”。最后，他分享了三条核心决策法则——包括“犹豫即拒绝”和“选择短期痛苦”——并指出人生最重要的三个决定是：和谁在一起、做什么工作，以及住在哪里。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: I had this insight or a question I guess How much do you think that we should trust the voice in our heads because half of wisdom suggests to rely on your sort of bottomup intuition and then half of it has to be sort of top down rational as possible How do you navigate the tension between head and gut in this way

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 我有一个洞见，或者说一个问题。你认为我们应该多大程度上相信我们脑海中的声音？因为一半的智慧建议依赖你那种自下而上的直觉，而另一半则认为要尽可能地进行自上而下的理性思考。你是如何驾驭头脑（Head）与直觉（Gut）之间的这种张力的？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: i think the gut is what decides Um the head is kind of what rationalizes it afterwards The gut is the ultimate decision maker If it doesn't and and what is the gut the gut is refined judgment It's taste aggregate aggregated and it could be aggregated through evolution uh and it's in your genes and your DNA or it could be aggregated through your experiences and what you've thought through The mind is good at solving new problems and uh new problems in the external world that have defi defined edges you know beginnings and ends and and objectives What the mind is actually really bad at is making hard decisions So when you have a hard decision to make I find it's better to yes you ruminate on it You think through all the pros and cons but then you sleep on it You wait a couple of days You wait until the gut answer appears with conviction and it feels right And when you're younger it takes longer because you just don't have as much experience And when you're older uh it can happen much faster which is why you know and you have less time to Yeah And old people just more set in their ways as a consequence right they know what they want They know what they don't want Um so it takes time to develop your gut instinct and judgment But once you've developed them don't trust anything else because you can't go against your gut It'll bite you in the end

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我认为是直觉在做决定。呃，头脑更像是在事后将其合理化。直觉是最终的决策者。如果……那么什么是直觉？直觉是经过提炼的判断。它是品味的集合——这种集合可能通过进化完成，存在于你的基因和DNA中；也可能通过你的经历和你思考过的事情集合而成。头脑擅长解决新问题，那些外部世界中有明确边界、有始有终和有目标的新问题。头脑实际上非常不擅长做艰难的决定。所以当你有一个艰难的决定要做时，我发现最好是——是的，你要反复思考，你想清楚所有的利弊——但然后你要“睡一觉”（sleep on it）。你等上几天。你等到直觉的答案带着确信出现，并且感觉是对的。当你年轻时，这需要更长的时间，因为你没有那么多经验。而当你老了，呃，这会发生得快得多，这就是为什么……你知道，而且你也剩下的时间也不多了。是的，结果就是老年人更固执己见，对吧？他们知道他们想要什么，他们知道他们不想要什么。呃，所以发展你的直觉本能和判断力需要时间。但一旦你发展了它们，就不要相信其他任何东西，因为你不能违背你的直觉。它最终会反噬你。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh usually in relationships that failed you can look back and say "Oh actually I knew it was going to fail because of this reason but I kind of went ahead anyway because I wanted it to be this way right i wanted this person to be a different way than they are or I wanted to get a different thing out of it than I thought I was going to than I knew I was going to get but I just wanted it." So sometimes desire will override your judgment and then trap Yeah Wishful thinking It traps you into a into a pathway that chews up time

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，通常在那些失败的关系中，你可以回过头来说：“噢，实际上我知道它会失败，是因为这个原因。但我还是继续了，因为我希望它是那个样子的，对吧？我希望这个人不是他们现在的样子，或者我想从中得到别的东西，而不是我知道我会得到的东西，但我就是想要它。”所以有时欲望会覆盖你的判断，然后把你困住。是的，一厢情愿（Wishful thinking）。它把你困在一条消耗时间的路径上。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: What's that uh inside of yours u we think we can't change ourselves but we can We think we can change other people but we can't

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你的那个洞见是什么来着？“我们认为我们不能改变自己，但我们可以；我们认为我们可以改变别人，但我们不能。”

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Exactly Uh I think to add to that you can't change other people You can change your reaction to them You can change yourself but other people only change through trauma or their own insight on their own schedule and never in a way that you like Yeah Alanderon says that uh people do sometimes change but rarely in relationships and never when they're told to Absolutely Yeah The fastest way to kind of alienate somebody is to tell them to change

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 没错。呃，我想补充一点，你不能改变别人。你可以改变你对他们的反应。你可以改变你自己，但别人只有通过创伤或他们自己的洞见，按照他们自己的时间表来改变，而且绝不会以你喜欢的方式改变。

[Chris Williamson]: 是的，Alain de Botton 说，呃，人们有时确实会改变，但在亲密关系中很少见，而且绝不会在被告知要改变时改变。

[Naval Ravikant]: 绝对是。是的。疏远某人最快的方法就是告诉他们要改变。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And coming back to the original point of you can't change people If you do want to change someone's behavior I I think the only effective way to do it is to compliment them when they do something you want Not to positive Yeah Exactly Not to insult them or be negative or critical when they do something you don't want And we can't help it It's obviously in our nature to criticize And I do it as well but it just reminds me that like when somebody does something praiseworthy don't forget to praise them Like definitely go out of your way and and it'll be genuine It has to be genuine It can't be a fake thing uh this is not you know one of those uh just dropping compliments type thing eventually that people will see through that They want authenticity but just don't forget to praise people when they do something praiseworthy and you'll get more of that behavior

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 回到最初的观点：你不能改变别人。如果你确实想改变某人的行为，我认为唯一有效的方法是在他们做了你想做的事情时赞美他们。不是去……（Chris: 正向强化？）是的，没错。而不是在他们做了你不想要的事情时侮辱他们、消极对待或批评他们。我们忍不住这样做，批评显然是我们的天性。我也这样做，但这只是提醒我，当有人做了值得称赞的事情时，别忘了赞美他们。一定要特意去做，而且必须是真诚的。它必须是真诚的，不能是假的。呃，这不是那种随口抛出赞美的套路，人们最终会看穿的。他们想要真诚，但只要别忘了在人们做值得称赞的事时赞美他们，你就会得到更多那样的行为。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: There was a a really famous thread on Reddit about five questions to ask yourself if you're uncertain about your relationship One of the questions was "Are you truly in love with your partner or just their potential or the idea of them?" And that's the you know they show such great promise They they look at their look at their ability for for for change and growth They they they they're on the right path The partner matching thing is so hard Uh you know when people come and ask me like "Oh should I be with this person?" Like "Well if you're asking me the answer is clearly no." Right because you wouldn't have to ask if you were with the right person

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: Reddit 上有一个非常有名的帖子，关于如果你对你的关系不确定，应该问自己五个问题。其中一个问题是：“你是真的爱你的伴侣，还是只爱他们的潜力或关于他们的概念？”那是……你知道，他们表现出巨大的前途。看看他们的……看看他们改变和成长的能力。他们走在正确的道路上。伴侣匹配这件事太难了。呃，你知道，当人们来问我：“噢，我应该和这个人在一起吗？”就像是：“好吧，如果你在问我，答案显然是不。”对吧，因为如果你和对的人在一起，你是不需要问的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: or when you ask someone like why they're uh in a relationship with somebody and they start reading out his or her resume right that's also a bad sign What do you mean oh it's like oh we have so much in common We like to golf together It's like it's not a basis for a relationship Or oh you know she's a ballerina or you know he went to Harvard or what have you These are resume items That's not who the person actually is What's a better answer i just love being with this person I just trust them I you know I I enjoy being around them I I I love how capable he is I love how kind kind she is You know I love her spirit I love his energy uh the more the the more materially and concretely definable the reasons are you're together the worse they are Uh the ineffable is actually where the sort of true love lies because real love is a form of unity It's a form of connection It's connecting spirits

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 或者当你问某人为什么和某人在一起，他们开始背诵他或她的简历，对吧，这也是一个坏信号。

[Chris Williamson]: 你是什么意思？

[Naval Ravikant]: 噢，就像是，“噢，我们有很多共同点，我们喜欢一起打高尔夫。”这不能作为关系的基础。或者，“噢，你知道她是芭蕾舞演员”，或者“你知道他去了哈佛”之类的。这些是简历项目。那不是这个人的本质。更好的答案是什么？“我就是喜欢和这个人在一起。我就是信任他们。我……你知道，我享受在他们身边。我爱他的能力。我爱她的善良。你知道，我爱她的精神，我爱他的能量。”呃，你们在一起的理由越是物质化、越是具体可定义，就越糟糕。呃，那种不可言喻（ineffable）的地方实际上才是真正的爱所在，因为真正的爱是一种形式的统一。它是一种形式的连接，是灵魂的连接。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: As you know Bourhees famously wrote "In every human there's a sense that something infinite has been lost." You know there's a God-shaped hole in you you're trying to fill And so we're always trying to find that connection Love is trying to find it in one other person and saying "Okay you're male I'm female or whatever." And you know whatever your predilictions are and now now we connect now we form a hole uh connected hole Or in mysticism it's like it's all about okay sit down meditate and you'll feel the whole In science it's like oh uh you know atoms bouncing is mechanics but that generates heat So thermodynamics and motion or kinetics are one combined theory that's a whole Electricity and magnetism are one thing that's that's the whole creates that sense of awe Uh in art it's like I feel an emotion I create a piece of art around it and then you see that painting or you see the cysteine chapel or you read the poem and you feel that emotion So again it's it's creating unity It's creating connection Uh and I think everybody craves that And so when you really love somebody it's because you you feel a sense of wholeness by being around them

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 正如你知道的，博尔赫斯（Borges）曾写过一句名言：“在每个人心中，都有一种失去了某种无限东西的感觉。”你知道，你体内有一个“上帝形状的洞”（God-shaped hole）试图去填补。所以我们总是试图找到那种连接。爱就是试图在另一个人身上找到它，然后说：“好吧，你是男性，我是女性，或其他什么。”你知道，不管你的偏好是什么，“现在我们连接了，现在我们形成了一个整体……呃，连接的整体。”或者在神秘主义中，这就像是关于，好吧，坐下来冥想，你会感受到那个整体。在科学中，就像是，噢，呃，你知道原子的弹跳是力学，但这会产生热量。所以热力学和运动或动力学是一个结合的理论，那是一个整体。电和磁是一回事，那就是整体，创造了那种敬畏感。呃，在艺术中，就像是我感受到一种情绪，我围绕它创造了一件艺术品，然后你看到那幅画，或者你看到西斯廷教堂，或者你读那首诗，你也感受到了那种情绪。所以再一次，这是在创造统一，这是在创造连接。呃，我认为每个人都渴望那个。所以当你真的爱某人时，是因为通过在他们身边，你感到了一种完整感（wholeness）。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Just sort of tying that into the life is short stop fucking about Uh if you're faced with a difficult choice and you cannot decide the answer is no And the reason is modern society is full of options Yeah Knowing this rationally sounds sounds great but having the courage to commit to it in reality I think is a different task And cutting your losses quickly in the big three relationships jobs and locations is hard

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 把它和“人生苦短，别瞎折腾”联系起来。呃，如果你面临一个艰难的选择，而你无法决定，答案就是“不”。原因是现代社会充满了选项。是的，理性上知道这一点听起来很棒，但在现实中有勇气去执行它是另一项任务。而且在“三大件”——关系、工作和地点——上快速止损是很难的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And uh so in decision-m I have a few heristics for myself Other people can use their own but mine are if you can't decide the answer is no If you're offered an opportunity if you have a new thing that you're saying yes or no to that is a change from where you're starting the answer is by default always no Secondly uh if you have two decisions if you have A or B and both seem like very equal take the path that's more painful in the short term the one that's going to be painful immediately because your brain is always trying to avoid pain So any pain that is imminent it is going to treat as much larger than it actually is This is kind of like a decision-making equivalent of Talib surgeon Uh tell surgeon where you want the surgeon that doesn't look as good because he's more likely to be a good surgeon Yeah it's similar in that appearances are deceiving because you're avoiding conflict You're avoiding pain So take the path is more painful in the short term because your brain is creating this illusion that the short-term pain is greater than the long-term pain

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，所以在决策中，我有几个给我自己的启发式法则（heuristics）。其他人可以用他们自己的，但我的是：

第一，如果你无法决定，答案就是“不”。如果有人给你一个机会，如果你要对一个新事物说“是”或“否”，而这是对你现状的改变，那么默认答案总是“不”。

第二，呃，如果你有两个决定，如果你有 A 或 B，两者看起来非常平等，选择那条在短期内更痛苦的路。那条会立即带来痛苦的路。因为你的大脑总是试图避免痛苦。所以任何迫在眉睫的痛苦，它都会将其视为比实际大得多。这有点像塔勒布（Taleb）那个“外科医生”例子的决策版。呃，你要找那个看起来不怎么样的外科医生，因为他更有可能是个好医生。是的，这很相似，表象是具有欺骗性的，因为你在避免冲突，你在避免痛苦。所以选择短期内更痛苦的路径，因为你的大脑制造了一种错觉，认为短期痛苦比长期痛苦更严重。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And then finally the last one which I would credit Kapo Gupta with uh is that you want to take it take the choice that will leave you more equinimous in the long term By quantumous he means like more at peace more mental peace in the long term So whatever clears your mind more and will have you having less self-t talk in the future if you can model that out that is probably the better route to go

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 然后最后一条，我要归功于 Kapil Gupta，呃，就是你要选择那个在长期内让你更“平心静气”（equanimous）的选项。平心静气是指更平静，长期内更多的内心平静。所以无论什么能让你的头脑更清醒，让你在未来有更少的自我对话——如果你能模拟出那个结果——那可能就是更好的路。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And then I would focus decision-m down on the three things that really matter because everything else is downstream of these these three decisions Especially these are early life decisions Later in life you have different things to optimize for But early in life you're trying to figure out who you're with what you're doing and where you live And I think on all three of those you want to think you want to think pretty hard about it And people do some of these unconsciously

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 然后我会把决策重点放在真正重要的三件事上，因为其他一切都是这三个决定的下游。特别是这些是早期生活的决定。在生活后期你有不同的东西要优化。但在生活早期，你要搞清楚：你和谁在一起、你在做什么、以及你住在哪里。我认为在这三件事上，你要思考，你要非常努力地思考。而人们往往无意识地做其中一些决定。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: You iterate on a closed time frame so you don't run out the clock And then you decide um on what you do You try a whole bunch of different things until you find the one that feels like play to you looks like work to others You can't lose at it Um get some leverage try to find some practical application of it and go into that And then where you live uh where you live is really important I don't think people spend enough time on that one I think people pick cities randomly based on where I went to school or where my family happened to be or where uh my friend was or I visited one weekend I really liked it You really want to think it through because where you live really constrains and defines your opportunities

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 你在一个封闭的时间框架内迭代，这样你就不会耗尽时间。然后你决定呃，你做什么。你尝试一大堆不同的事情，直到你找到那个对你来说像玩耍、对别人来说像工作的事情。你在这种事上不会输。呃，利用一些杠杆，试着找到它的实际应用，然后投入进去。然后是你住在哪里。呃，你住在哪里真的很重要。我不认为人们在这上面花了足够的时间。我认为人们随机地选择城市，基于我在哪里上学，或者我的家人碰巧在哪里，或者呃我的朋友在哪里，或者我某个周末去玩真的很喜欢那里。你真的要想清楚，因为你住在哪里真正约束并定义了你的机会。

章节 11：那些无法传授的人生课题

📝 本节摘要：

在本章中，Naval 朗读了他写的一篇名为《无法传授的课题》（Unteachable Lessons）的短文。文中列举了一系列人们听过无数次却总是选择忽略的真理（如“金钱买不来幸福”、“担忧无济于事”），直到亲身经历痛苦后才幡然醒悟。他指出，我们总是自负地认为自己是“例外”，能躲过命运的绊马索，但最终都会掉进同一个坑里。随后，Naval 与 Chris 探讨了这些建议的语境依赖性：许多智慧在大尺度上是矛盾的（如“多陪父母”与“追求成功”），只有通过亲自生活和试错，才能在特定情境下找到平衡。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I want to just read you a twominute essay that I wrote uh a couple of weeks ago So it's called unteachable lessons

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我想给你读一篇我几周前写的两分钟短文，题目叫《无法传授的课题》。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Okay I've been thinking about a special category of lesson one which you cannot discover without experiencing it firsthand There is a certain subset of advice that for some reason we all refuse to learn through instruction These are unteachable lessons No matter how arduous or costly or effortful it is going to be for us to find out ourselves we prefer to disregard the mountains of warnings from our elders songs literature historical catastrophes public scandals and instead think some version of "Yeah that might be true for them but not for me."

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 好的。我一直在思考一类特殊的课题，那就是如果不亲身经历就无法发现的课题。有那么一类建议，出于某种原因，我们都拒绝通过教导来学习。这些就是“无法传授的课题”。无论我们要付出多么艰辛、昂贵或费力的代价去自己发现真相，我们都宁愿无视长辈、歌曲、文学、历史灾难和公共丑闻中堆积如山的警告，转而抱有一种想法：“是啊，那对他们来说可能是真的，但对我不是。”

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: We decide to learn the hard lessons the hard way over and over again Unfortunately they all seem to be the big things too It's never new insights about how to put up level shelves or charmingly introduce yourself at a cocktail party Instead we spend most of our lives learning firsthand the most important lessons that the previous generations already warned us about Things like money won't make you happy Fame won't fix your self worth You don't love that pretty girl She's just hot and difficult to get Nothing is as important as you think it is when you're thinking about it You will regret working too much Worrying is not improving your performance All your fears are a waste of time You should see your parents more You'll be fine after the breakup and will be grateful that you did it It's perfectly okay to cut toxic people out of your life

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我们决定一次又一次地通过“硬碰硬”的方式来学习这些惨痛的教训。不幸的是，它们似乎也都是些大事。从来不是关于如何把架子装平或者如何在鸡尾酒会上迷人地介绍自己这类新见解。相反，我们花了大半辈子去亲身体验上一代人已经警告过我们的那些最重要的教训。比如：金钱不会让你幸福；名声无法修复你的自我价值；你不爱那个漂亮的女孩，她只是身材火辣且难以追到；没有任何事情像你正在思考它时显得那么重要；你会后悔工作太辛苦；担忧并不能提高你的表现；你所有的恐惧都是浪费时间；你应该多去看看你的父母；分手后你会好起来的，而且你会感激你分了手；把有毒的人从你的生活中剔除是完全没问题的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And even reading this list back I'm rolling my eyes at how fucking trite it is These are all basic bitch obvious insights that everybody has heard before But if they're so basic why does everyone so reliably fall prey to them throughout our lives and if they're so obvious why do people who have recently become famous or wealthy or lost a parent or gone through a breakup start to proclaim these facts with the renewed grandio ceremony of someone who's just gone through religious revelation

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 即使现在回读这份清单，我都在翻白眼，觉得它们真是太他妈陈词滥调了。这些都是每个人都听过的、最基础、最显而易见的道理。但如果它们如此基础，为什么每个人在一生中都会如此可靠地成为它们的牺牲品？如果它们如此显而易见，为什么那些最近成名、致富、失去父母或经历分手的人，会开始以一种仿佛刚经历宗教启示般的宏大仪式感来宣扬这些事实？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: it's also a very contentious list of points to say on the internet If you interview a billionaire who says that all of his money didn't make him happy or a movie star who said that her fame felt like a prison the internet will tear them apart for being ungrateful and out of touch So not only do we refuse to learn these lessons we even refuse to hear the message from those warning us about them

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 而且在互联网上说这些也是非常有争议的。如果你采访一位亿万富翁，他说所有的钱并没有让他快乐；或者一位电影明星说她的名声感觉像座监狱，互联网会把他们撕碎，说他们忘恩负义、脱离现实。所以，我们不仅拒绝学习这些教训，我们甚至拒绝听取那些警告我们的人发出的信息。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And even more than that I think for every one of these if I consider a bit deeper I can recall a time including right now where I convinced myself that I am the exception to the rule That my particular mental makeup or life situation or historical wounds or dreams for the future render me immune to these lessons being applicable No no no My inner landscape would be solved by skirting around the most well-known wisdom of the ages No no no I can thread this needle properly Watch me dance through the minefield and avoid all of the trip wires that everyone else kicks And then you kick one And you share a knowing look the kind that can only occur between two people who have been hurt in the exact same way And a voice in the back of your mind will say "I told you so."

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 甚至不仅如此，我认为对于这些教训中的每一个，如果我思考得更深一点，我都能回想起某个时刻——包括现在——我相信自己是规则的例外。我相信我独特的精神构造、生活境遇、历史创伤或对未来的梦想，使我能够免疫于这些教训。不，不，不。我的内心图景可以通过绕过那些千古流传的最著名智慧来解决。不，不，不。我可以穿好这根针。看我在雷区中起舞，避开所有别人都会踢到的绊线。然后你也踢到了一根。接着你（与过来人）交换了一个心照不宣的眼神——那种只有在两个受过完全相同伤害的人之间才会出现的眼神。然后你脑后会有个声音说：“我早就告诉过你了。”

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: That's undeniable It's a good essay I I think one of the reasons why these lessons are unteachable is because uh they're too broad They have to be applied in context A number of the ones that you laid out contradict each other Like spend more time with your parents and you know don't work so hard but you know at the same time you do want to be successful right i think I think a lot of these lessons come from down on high from as you said like the famous movie star or the billionaire saying oh you don't need to be happy It's like well okay then give it up bitch right

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 真是无法反驳。这是一篇好文章。我想这些教训之所以无法传授，原因之一是因为呃，它们太宽泛了。它们必须在语境中应用。你列出的许多教训互相矛盾。比如“多花时间陪父母”和“别工作太辛苦”，但你知道同时你也确实想成功，对吧？我认为很多这类教训来自高高在上的人，正如你所说，像著名的电影明星或亿万富翁说“噢，你不需要（那些）来获得快乐”。这就像是，“好吧，那你放弃它啊，贱人”，对吧？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: uh so in reality I think many of these contradict each other and they it's like if you went to school and you just studied philosophy for four years you would not know how to live life because you wouldn't know which philosophical doctrine to apply in which circumstance Uh you have to actually live life go through all of the issues to figure out what it is that you want What's the context in which some of these things apply and some of them don't Um yes you want to visit your parents more often but you don't want to live with your parents and you don't want to necessarily see them every day or every weekend depending on the parent You might not get along with one of them So I think it is highly contextual

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，所以在现实中，我认为其中许多是相互矛盾的。这就像如果你去上学，只学了四年哲学，你还是不知道如何生活，因为你不知道在什么情况下应用哪种哲学教条。呃，你必须真正去生活，经历所有的问题，才能搞清楚你到底想要什么。在什么语境下这些东西适用，什么语境下不适用。呃，是的，你想多看望父母，但你不想和父母住在一起，也不一定想每天或每个周末都见他们，这取决于父母的情况。你可能和其中一个合不来。所以我认为这是高度依赖语境的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um that said I I I would argue that once you figure it out for yourself you can kind of carve these variations on these maxims that apply to you and uh then you'll have a specific experience that helps you remember it and actually execute on it And you can also phrase it in a way where it's not trit anymore So like Yeah So so a lot of my maxims and notes to self are carved in a way that they're modernized They're saying something true which might be trit if I didn't say it in a new way or in an interesting way that is more relevant to me today There was a Nobel Prize winner who said something to the effect of uh everything worth saying may have been said before but given that nobody was listening it must be said again

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，即便如此，我认为一旦你自己搞明白了，你就可以雕琢出适用于你的格言变体。呃，然后你会有一个具体的经历帮助你记住它，并真正执行它。你也可以用一种不再陈腐的方式来表述它。所以，是的。所以我的很多格言和给自己的笔记都是经过雕琢的，使它们现代化了。它们在说一些真实的东西，如果我不用一种新的方式、或者一种对我今天更有趣、更相关的方式来说，可能会显得陈腐。有一位诺贝尔奖得主说过类似的话：所有值得说的话可能以前都被说过了，但既然没人听进去，那就必须再说一遍。

章节 12：真正的智慧与被误解的表达

📝 本节摘要：

在本章中，Chris 坦诚分享了自己的“救赎之路”：从一个为了显得聪明而死记硬背的“派对男孩”，转变为真正追求智慧的求知者。Naval 指出，把简单的事情说得复杂是骗子的标志，真正的理解不需要术语堆砌。两人深入探讨了“表演型人格”的陷阱——Chris 在心理治疗中发现自己仍在使用“播客主播人格”进行表演，而 Naval 也承认自己脑海中常驻着一个“播客嘉宾 Naval”。最后，Naval 透露了他选择接受本次访谈的奇特原因：在他的脑内剧场中，Chris 恰好是那个坐在他对面的人。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: I've heard you say uh you talk about the difference between seeming wise and being wise that uh you tried to appear smart as a kid uh by sort of wrote memorization masquerading as insight and wisdom and uh I I certainly feel that you know a lot of the show for me I think has been was and still is a redemption arc from this you know decade of my life where I completely suppressed any intellectual curiosity It's like okay I'll be a professional party boy for 10 years stand on the front door of a nightclub and give out VIP wristbands and have access to all of the pretty girls or you know the cool parties or whatever it might be

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 我听你说过……你谈到“显得智慧”和“真正智慧”的区别。你说你小时候试图通过死记硬背伪装成洞见和智慧来让自己显得聪明。呃，我确实感觉，你知道，对我来说，这个节目在很大程度上曾经是，现在仍然是我的一个“救赎弧光”（redemption arc）。为了弥补我生命中那完全压抑任何求知欲的十年。就像是，好吧，我要当10年的职业派对男孩，站在夜店前门，分发VIP手环，接触所有漂亮的女孩，或者你知道，参加很酷的派对或其他什么。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Seems like it worked out Okay it did in some ways I mean isn't that fun it's it it was look it was a good way to spend my 20ies but to sort of come back above put your head above water two degrees one of which was a masters and then this like just shut down any of that learn I mean I I did that while I was at uni While I was at uni I was running the events So it's actually a decade and a half And uh I think there was a big redemption arc within this show And I I constantly have to kind of wipe the slime off me of this sense that I need to prove myself And so much of it this why it really resonates with me Um when you're memorizing things that indicates that you don't understand them or that sort of yeah wrote memorization and regurgitation masquerading as wisdom Um because people use fluency as a proxy for truthfulness and insight They use the complexity of your language and your communication

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 看起来结果还不错。

[Chris Williamson]: 还可以，这确实在某些方面行得通。我的意思是，那难道不好玩吗？听着，那是度过20多岁的好方式。但要某种程度上重新浮出水面……我有两个学位，其中一个是硕士，然后就像是关闭了所有的学习。我的意思是，我在上大学的时候就在做这些，我在上大学的时候就在策划活动。所以实际上那是15年。呃，我认为在这个节目里有一个巨大的救赎弧光。我必须不断地擦掉那种“我需要证明自己”的黏液感。这就是为什么你的话真的让我产生共鸣。呃，当你背诵东西时，这表明你不理解它们。或者是那种死记硬背和反刍，伪装成了智慧。呃，因为人们把“流利度”当作真实性和洞察力的代理指标。他们利用语言和沟通的复杂性来唬人。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Yeah There's a lot of jargon out there I think it's it's it's the mark of a charlatan to explain a simple thing in a complex way And so when you see people using very complicated language to explain simple things they're either trying to impress you and offiscate or they don't understand it themselves

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 是的。外面有很多行话（jargon）。我认为把简单的事情解释得很复杂是骗子（charlatan）的标志。所以当你看到人们用非常复杂的语言来解释简单的事情时，他们要么是试图打动你并混淆视听，要么是他们自己根本不理解。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Well there's an allure in that though You know this was one of the things I had to do when I went to therapy It's kind of an interesting I think I've talked about this before Um I needed to turn off podcast Chris when I stepped into therapy because most of the time that I spend one-on-one in a deep conversation that's undistracted throughout the week I trained myself over you know when I started doing it 700 episodes now 900 whatever Uh and I I knew what I could do to say to this therapist some you know to just sort of veer off a little and create some nice story put a bow on it push it across the table and watch your eyes light up a little bit like a little grin or a self-deprecating joke or whatever I'm like you're not here You're you're performing You're doing this You're doing the Chris Williamson thing with the sort of jazz hands So I have my own version

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 嗯，但这其中有一种诱惑力。你知道，这是我在接受心理治疗时必须做的一件事。这有点有趣，我想我以前谈过这个。呃，当我走进治疗室时，我需要关掉“播客里的 Chris”（Podcast Chris）。因为我一周中大部分时间都在进行一对一的、不受干扰的深度对话，我训练了自己……你知道，从我开始做到现在700集，或者900集什么的。呃，我知道我可以对治疗师说什么，你知道，稍微偏离一点话题，编一个好听的故事，打个漂亮的蝴蝶结，把它推过桌子，然后看着你的眼睛亮起来一点，比如露出一点笑容，或者来个自嘲的笑话什么的。我就想：你并不在这里。你在表演。你在做这个，你在做那个带着“爵士手”（jazz hands，夸张手势）的 Chris Williamson 的秀。所以我也有我自己的版本。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Okay tell me Okay so you have podcast Chris I have podcast guest Naval Precisely So very often I'll uh think of something I'll have some what I think is an insight and I want to tweet it or write it down but in my mind I'm talking about it on a podcast That's kind of how my mind registers it And for a while I thought this was a bad thing and I tried to eradicate podcastal and then I just realized that's just how it comes out So I might as well just be okay with it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 好的，告诉我。好吧，所以你有“播客 Chris”，我有“播客嘉宾 Naval”。没错。所以我经常会呃，想到什么东西，我会有一些我认为是洞见的东西，我想发推特或写下来，但在我的脑海里，我是在播客上谈论它。这有点像我的大脑注册它的方式。有一段时间我认为这是一件坏事，我试图根除“播客 Naval”，然后我意识到那只是它流露出来的方式。所以我不如就接受它。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Now do you know the reason I'm on this podcast no You know I haven't done a proper formal interview straight up top whatever 10 20 podcasts in a long time since Rogan maybe Probably since Rogan Yep Yeah it went out at the top right that was a theory Yeah Well it's still at the top Yeah Yeah I know And and then you know I've done some stuff with Tim Tim Ferrris a good friend but that's been more co-hosting I haven't been a guest Um and then I did one or two random things where I just stumbled into a thing where I you know there was a reason but it wasn't like this

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 那么你知道我上这个播客的原因吗？

[Chris Williamson]: 不知道。

[Naval Ravikant]: 你知道，我已经很久没有做一个正经的、正式的、那种顶级的 Top 10 或 Top 20 的播客访谈了。大概自从上 Joe Rogan 的节目之后吧。

[Chris Williamson]: 自从 Rogan 之后？是的。在巅峰时退出，对吧，那是个理论。

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的。嗯，它依然在巅峰。我知道。然后你知道，我和 Tim Ferriss 做过一些东西，他是好朋友，但那更多是共同主持，我不是嘉宾。呃，然后我做过一两件随机的事情，我只是偶然碰上了，你知道那是为了某种原因，但不像这次这样。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And I reached out to you for this one right i have lots of people reaching out to me for podcasts I do not answer them I reached out to you And the reason is a really funny one It's because when I am playing podcast in the vault in my head for some reason you're on the other side And I don't know why I literally don't know why It's not like I've even seen many of your podcasts I think I've seen some snippets here and there but for some reason you were the guy in the podcast in podcast And so I was like I might as well just do it So I reached out to you

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 这次是我主动联系你的，对吧？有很多人联系我要做播客，我不回复他们。但我联系了你。原因真的很有趣。是因为当我在我脑海的金库里播放“播客”时，出于某种原因，坐在对面的人是你。我不知道为什么，我真的不知道为什么。并不是说我看过很多你的播客，我想我只是在这儿那儿看过一些片段。但出于某种原因，你是那个“播客中的播客”里的人。所以我就想，我不妨就真的做一次。所以我联系了你。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: I wonder if this will close that loop or further entrench it I wonder if you've made it way worse now and you're just gonna have Well first off it was a dream and now it's reality plus a dream and I can't get away from him

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 我想知道这会关闭那个循环还是进一步巩固它。我想知道你现在是不是把它变得更糟了，你只会……

[Naval Ravikant]: 嗯，首先它是梦，现在它是现实加梦境，我摆脱不了他了。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Well I appreciate you you said on Rogan and this was something you know to kind of pay it back to you Uh I had a a fiveheaded Mount Rushmore of guests before I started this show and it was Jordan Peterson Sam Harris Alanderon from the School of Life you and Rogan and that was my uh hydra of Mount Rushmore And uh I knew I think someone had asked you at some point maybe it was a tweet or something after Rogan or maybe even said it on Rogan where you said "Uh I don't like to say the same thing twice at least not in the same way." I don't like sequels Yeah

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 嗯，我很感激你。你在 Rogan 的节目上说过——这也是为了某种程度上回馈你——呃，在我开始这个节目之前，我心中有一个“五人总统山”（Mount Rushmore）嘉宾名单：Jordan Peterson、Sam Harris、Alain de Botton（人生学校的）、你，还有 Rogan。那是我的呃，多头总统山。呃，我知道——我想有人在某个时候问过你，也许是在 Rogan 之后的推特上，或者甚至是你在 Rogan 节目上说的——你说：“呃，我不喜欢把同一件事说两遍，至少不想用同样的方式说。”

[Naval Ravikant]: 我不喜欢续集。是的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Well I I think the reason why I wanted to be on this is because for some reason I have the impression that you engage in conversations and I like conversations I don't like interviews Mhm This is why I was doing my last startup air chat which was all about conversations And conversations to me are more genuine They're more authentic There's a give and take There's a back and forth There's a genuine curiosity

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 嗯，我想我想来这里的原因是因为出于某种原因，我有种印象：你会进行对话，而我喜欢对话。我不喜欢采访。这就是为什么我在做我上一个创业项目 Airchat，那完全是关于对话的。对我来说，对话更真诚。它们更真实。有付出也有收获，有来有往。有一种真正的求知欲。

章节 13：财富的终极运用与慈善的真相

📝 本节摘要：

在这一章中，Naval 探讨了财富积累后的使用之道。他认为，最好的慈善并非捐给那些反馈回路松散、甚至带有欺诈性质的非营利组织，而是像 Elon Musk 那样将资金重新投入到自己的事业中，为人类创造更大的价值。他批评了向常春藤盟校捐款的行为，并透露自己更倾向于匿名支持物理学等高杠杆领域，以避免将慈善变为“身份游戏”。对于个人消费，他建议用钱买回时间（自由），对他人要慷慨（总是溢价支付），并强调不应追求传统的退休，而应进入“永久退休”状态——即只做自己想做的事，不论那是否被定义为工作。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: You've spent a lot of time either creating wealth or thinking about how to create wealth What have you learned are the best places to spend wealth to spend wealth Yeah Yeah How you you spend this time creating this wealth accumulating how does what are the best ways for you to put it back out

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你花了很多时间创造财富或者思考如何创造财富。关于花钱的最佳去处，你学到了什么？花钱。是的。是的。你花了这么多时间创造财富、积累财富，那么把它花出去的最佳方式是什么？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: i actually think Elon had this one figured out which is he plowed his own money back into his own businesses to go and do bigger and better things for humanity Um so what I would like to you know you could give it to nonprofits but a lot of nonprofits are grifty or it's people who didn't earn it trying to spend it or they don't have tight feedback loops on having a good effect

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我其实觉得 Elon Musk 把这一点想得很透，那就是他把自己的钱重新投入到自己的生意中，去为人类做更大、更好的事情。呃，所以我想……你知道，你可以把钱给非营利组织，但很多非营利组织都有点诈骗性质（grifty），或者是那些没赚过钱的人在试图花钱，或者他们在产生良好效果方面没有紧密的反馈回路。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So one of the things I want to do as an aside is I want to create a little school for young physicists But that's that's my nonprofit A young physicist Yeah that that that's my nonprofit thing But uh and I've been and I've actually uh underwritten uh media and some physics stuff I don't like to talk about it So I don't I don't talk about my whatever so-called philanthropy because I think that makes it less real That makes it more status oriented Makes it less philanthropic

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以顺便说一句，我想做的一件事是我想为年轻物理学家建一所小学校。那是我的非营利项目。年轻物理学家？是的，那是我的非营利项目。但我呃，实际上我也资助过媒体和一些物理学的东西。我不喜欢谈论它。我不谈论我所谓的慈善事业，因为我觉得那样会让它变得不那么真实。那会让它变得更像是为了地位。让它变得不那么像慈善了。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Yeah Exactly And then people look at how charitable my charity is And then people also come hunting for money So there's all that disease I don't believe in giving to schools They have enough money Ivy Leagues have enough money and they don't know how to spend it So I think the best use of money is I think a good business creates a product for people that they voluntarily buy and they get value out of So in that sense I think Steve Jobs and Elon and and uh entrepreneurs like that have created a lot of value for the world

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 是的。

[Naval Ravikant]: 没错。然后人们会看我的慈善有多慈善，然后人们也会来以此为名找钱。所以有各种弊病。我不相信捐款给学校。他们有足够的钱。常春藤盟校有足够的钱，而且他们不知道怎么花。所以我认为钱的最好用途是……我认为一个好的企业会为人们创造一种他们自愿购买并从中获得价值的产品。所以从这个意义上说，我认为史蒂夫·乔布斯和 Elon 以及呃像那样的企业家为世界创造了很多价值。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So one of the things I can do is I can take my own money and I can invest it in myself to go and build the next great thing that I think needs to exist And that's basically what I'm doing right now I'm doing a new business I'm self-unding it Um I'm plying a lot of money into it I'm going to build something that I think is beautiful that I want to see exist Um I really want to see exist

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以我也能做的一件事就是拿我自己的钱，投资我自己，去建立下一个我认为需要存在的伟大事物。这基本上就是我现在正在做的事情。我在做一个新生意，我在自筹资金。呃，我投入了很多钱进去。我要建立一些我认为美好的、我想看到它存在的东西。呃，我真的想看到它存在。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Have you spoken about this yet or is it still dark mode it's so early It's Yeah maybe I'll show it to you in a few months Uh hopefully 6 months Um and uh I'm excited about it and that's a good use of money

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你谈论过这个吗？还是它还在“黑暗模式”（保密阶段）？

[Naval Ravikant]: 还太早了。是的，也许几个月后我会展示给你看。呃，希望是6个月。呃，我对它很兴奋，那是钱的一个好用途。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: What about the worst places to spend wealth what is the old line if it flies floats or fornicates Well very nice way to change the final F Very impressive That's the way I heard it Can't take credit for that I'm pretty sure it's Fox but yeah Yeah Yeah I think that was u Maybe it was uh Felix Dennis Okay Who who had that quote Yeah He said "If a flies floats or fornicates rented I I think the last one was a little too it's wrong that he he didn't have a family didn't have kids." So you know he missed the big one

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 那么花钱最糟糕的地方呢？那句老话怎么说的？如果它能飞、能漂或者是能私通（fornicates）……

[Naval Ravikant]: 嗯，把最后一个 F 开头的词（fucks）改得很好。印象深刻。

[Chris Williamson]: 我是听别人这么说的。我不能居功。我很确定那是 Fox 说的，但是是的。

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的。我想那是……也许是 Felix Dennis。

[Chris Williamson]: 好的。是谁说的这句名言？

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的。他说：“如果它能飞、能漂或能做爱（fucks/fornicates），那就租它。”我想最后那个有点太……这是错误的，因为他没有家庭，没有孩子。所以你知道，他错过了最重要的一项。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um but yeah there there are lots of bad ways to spend money Uh I I I believe in investment you know I don't believe in consumption Uh yes you can you're born with a short housing position You close that out you get yourself a nice house Um get yourself some help to free up your time so you're not doing uh things that other people can do better Um treat people well You know always overpay and expect the best Uh pay them like they're the best and expect the best

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，但是是的，有很多糟糕的花钱方式。呃，我相信投资，你知道，我不相信消费。呃，是的，你可以……你生来就持有“住房空头头寸”（short housing position，意指需要住房但没有）。你把它平仓，给自己买个好房子。呃，给自己找些帮手来释放你的时间，这样你就不用做那些呃别人能做得更好的事情。呃，善待他人。你知道，总是溢价支付（overpay）并期待最好的结果。呃，像对待最优秀的人那样付钱给他们，并期待最优秀的表现。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um but overall I think a good use of money is to take risks and build things and do things that other people can't do Align it with your own unique talent so you can keep delivering to the world I'm not going to sit idle Uh I'm not going to retire That's a that's a waste of whatever time I have left on this earth Um and if I'm doing something I enjoy then I'm already in perpetual retirement Um because work is just a set of things you want to do that that that you have to do that you don't want to do So if you want to do it it's not work

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，但总的来说，我认为钱的好用途是去承担风险，去建立事物，做别人做不到的事情。把它与你独特的才华结合起来，这样你就可以继续向世界交付价值。我不会闲坐着。呃，我不会退休。那是在浪费我在这个地球上剩下的时间。呃，如果我在做我享受的事情，那么我已经处于“永久退休”（perpetual retirement）状态了。呃，因为工作只是一组你想做的事情……或者说你必须做但你不想做的事情。所以如果你想做它，它就不是工作。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um and so there are things that I want to do don't feel like work I can put money behind them and I can use that to make instantiate them into reality And I don't want to say make the world a better place cuz that's too trit but it's more just create a product that I'm proud of that wouldn't exist otherwise that other people will get tremendous value And it's been enabled through wealth because you're able to take a level of risk that you wouldn't have been able to otherwise Exactly Yeah Wealth gives you freedom It gives you freedom to explore more options And in my case it gives me freedom to start businesses without having to ask other people for permission or to warp my vision based on uh their desires to make a return or how they think money should be made

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，所以有一些我想做的事情，感觉不像工作。我可以在背后投入资金，我可以利用资金将它们在现实中实例化。我不想说“让世界变得更美好”，因为那太陈腐了。更多的是创造一个我引以为豪的产品，如果没有我它就不会存在，而其他人会从中获得巨大的价值。这正是通过财富得以实现的，因为你有能力承担你原本无法承担的风险水平。

[Chris Williamson]: 没错。

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的。财富给你自由。它给你探索更多选项的自由。而在我的情况下，它给了我创办企业的自由，而不必征求别人的许可，也不必基于呃他们赚钱的欲望或他们认为钱该怎么赚的想法来扭曲我的愿景。

章节 14：哲学的演进：第一性原理与悖论消解

📝 本节摘要：

本章探讨了哲学的本质及其随科学进步的演变。Naval 将哲学定义为从具体经验中提炼出的“普遍真理”，用于指导未来的决策。他指出，哲学并非一成不变，科学（如天文学、物理学）和道德（如废除奴隶制、承认婴儿痛觉）的进步都在不断重塑我们的哲学观。最后，他提供了一个解决“自由意志”与“人生意义”等终极悖论的思维模型：悖论往往源于错位——即用宇宙尺度的答案去回答人类尺度的问题。只要在提问的同一层面回答，悖论自会消解。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: What is philosophy everyone you live long enough you'll be a philosopher Philosophy is just when you find the hidden generalizable truths among the specific experiences that you've had in life and then you know how to navigate future specific experiences based on some heristics and you create a philosophy around that Any subject pursued deeply enough will eventually lead to philosophy Mastery in anything literally anything will lead you to being a philosopher You just have to stick with it long enough and generalize the truths back out And these are universal truths It's back to the unity and variety You can find you can find unity in anything if you go deep enough

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 什么是哲学？每个人只要活得够久，都会成为哲学家。哲学仅仅是你从生活中经历的具体经验中，找到了隐藏的、可推广泛化的真理，然后你知道如何基于某些启发式方法来驾驭未来的具体经历，并围绕此建立一套哲学。任何学科只要钻研得足够深，最终都会通向哲学。任何事情上的精通，真的是任何事情，都会让你成为哲学家。你只需要坚持得足够久，并从中反向归纳出真理。这些是普遍真理。这又回到了统一性与多样性。如果你钻得足够深，你可以在任何事物中找到统一性。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh but you know sometimes you learn new things Sometimes you do figure out new things too Uh even even in philosophy for example science has advanced as science has advanced it's actually expanded our boundaries of philosophy Um when we used to think that uh you know the earth was the center of the universe you would actually have a different philosophical outlook than when you think the universe is vast and we're infantestimally small It will give you a different philosophical outlook uh the same way if you think that uh the nature is driven by angels and demons and gods versus if there are laws of physics that are computable and understandable that will lead you to a different philosophical outlook

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，但你知道，有时你会学到新东西，有时你也确实能搞懂新事物。呃，甚至在哲学领域，例如，随着科学的进步，它实际上拓展了我们哲学的边界。呃，当我们过去认为呃，你知道，地球是宇宙的中心时，你的哲学观实际上会与当你认为宇宙浩瀚无垠而我们微不足道时截然不同。这会给你一种不同的哲学观。同样，如果你认为呃自然是由天使、恶魔和神灵驱动的，对比如果你认为存在可计算、可理解的物理定律，那也会导致你拥有不同的哲学观。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Uh if you think that knowledge is something that is passed down from above and through generations versus something that is created on the fly and then tested against reality that will lead you to a different philosophical outlook If you think humans are created by God as opposed to humans evolved from some you know unicellular organism yeah it still doesn't solve the original problem Who created that but at least it takes you further down the down the road Even sim theory is an attempt at reformulating philosophy based on what we know about computers even though it kind of leads to a lot of the same conclusions as you know creator But it it it is at least philosophy that is informed by technology and by science

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，如果你认为知识是从上天并通过世代传承下来的，对比如果你认为知识是即时创造并随后通过现实检验的，那会导致不同的哲学观。如果你认为人类是上帝创造的，而不是从某种单细胞生物进化而来的——是的，这仍然没有解决最初的问题“谁创造了那个单细胞”，但这至少带你在这条路上走得更远了。甚至模拟理论（Sim Theory）也是一种基于我们对计算机的了解来重构哲学的尝试，尽管它在某种程度上导向了许多与“造物主”相同的结论。但它至少是被技术和科学所告知的哲学。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So philosophy can also invol evolve moral philosophy evolves right uh there was a time when every culture practically that was a conquering culture practice slavery now almost all cultures abort slavery that's moral philosophy having evolved um you know there was even like this sounds too ludicrous to be true and I don't know if it fully is true but there were a a fairly large group of doctors based on studies who believed until the 1980s that babies couldn't feel pain and so even to this day I think circumcision is done without anesthesia and because under the theory that you know very young children babies don't feel pain and that's ludicrous and there was a study that came out in the 80s that said no no no they do feel pain it's like oh yeah of course right so people can be stuck in bad philosophical traps for a long period of time so even philosophy can make progress

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以哲学也可以进化。道德哲学在进化，对吧？呃，曾经有一段时间，实际上每个征服性文化都实行奴隶制，现在几乎所有文化都废除了奴隶制，这就是道德哲学的进化。呃，你知道，甚至有这样的事——这听起来太荒谬了，简直难以置信，我不知道这是否完全属实——但在直到1980年代之前，有一大群医生基于研究认为婴儿感觉不到疼痛。所以直到今天，我认为割礼还是在不打麻药的情况下进行的，就是基于那个理论，你知道，非常年幼的孩子、婴儿感觉不到疼痛。那是荒谬的。80年代有一项研究出来说，不不不，他们确实能感觉到疼痛。就像是，“噢，那是当然的啊”，对吧？所以人们可能会长期陷入糟糕的哲学陷阱中，因此即使是哲学也能取得进步。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: and uh as an example one of the realizations that I had and this is thanks to uh David Deutsch and my friend James Pierce and also thinking it through a little bit is that there are these timeless old questions that we run into where the answers seem like paradoxes So we stop thinking about them So an example is free will Do you have free will or does anything matter is there a meaning to life and there and and we get stuck in them because for example is there a meaning to life like yes life has a meaning because you're you're right here You create your own meaning This this moment has all the meaning you could imagine It's all the meaning there is On the other hand you're going to die It all goes to zero Heat Death The universe has no meaning Right so which one is it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 而且呃，举个例子，我有的一个领悟——这要感谢 David Deutsch 和我的朋友 James Pierce，以及我自己的一点思考——那就是我们遇到的那些看似永恒的古老问题，其答案似乎都是悖论。所以我们停止思考它们。举个例子，自由意志。你有自由意志吗？或者任何事情有意义吗？人生有意义吗？我们被困在其中，因为例如，“人生有意义吗？”是的，人生有意义，因为你就站在这里。你创造你自己的意义。这一刻拥有你能想象到的所有意义。它是所有的意义所在。另一方面，你会死。一切归零。热寂（Heat Death）。宇宙没有意义。对吧，那是哪一个呢？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: well the reason why it seems paradoxical is because you're asking the question of a human here and now at a certain scale and a certain time and then you're answering it from the viewpoint of the universe over infinite time So you pull the trick You switch the level at which you're answering the question And questions should be answered at the level at which they're asked So if you ask the question is there meaning you Chris are asking that question Yes Yes To Chris there is meaning There's meaning right here This is the meaning you can interpret any meaning you want onto it Um don't ask the question as Chris and then answer it as God or as the universe That's the trick that you're playing That's why it seems paradoxical

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 嗯，它之所以看起来像悖论，是因为你在作为一个此时此地、处于特定尺度和特定时间的人在提问，然后你却从宇宙跨越无限时间的视角来回答它。所以你耍了个把戏。你切换了回答问题的层级。而问题应该在它被提出的层级上得到回答。所以如果你问“有意义吗？”，是你，Chris，在问这个问题。是的。是的。对 Chris 来说是有意义的。就在这里有意义。这就是意义，你可以把任何你想要的意义解读上去。呃，不要作为 Chris 提问，然后作为上帝或宇宙来回答。那是你在玩弄的把戏。这就是为什么它看起来像悖论。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: The same way you can say do I have free will people debate free will all day long This the question is answered at the wrong frame So they ask the question is do I as an individual have free will hell yeah I have free will My mind body system can't predict what I'm going to do next The universe is infinitely complex I'm making a choice in my mind and I'm doing something There's my free will So answer at the level at which you were asked Of course I have free will because I feel like I have free will and I treat you like you have free will and you treat me like I have free will We have free will

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 同样的方式，你可以说我有自由意志吗？人们整天辩论自由意志。这个问题是在错误的框架下回答的。所以如果他们问的问题是“我作为一个个体有自由意志吗？”该死的，当然我有自由意志。我的身心系统无法预测我下一步要做什么。宇宙是无限复杂的。我在脑海中做出选择，我在做某事。这就是我的自由意志。所以在你被问到的层级上回答。当然我有自由意志，因为我感觉我有自由意志，我也把你当作有自由意志来对待，你也把我当作有自由意志来对待。我们有自由意志。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: The problem then is you start trying to answer the question as if you're the universe You're like well on the universal scale big bang particle collisions No one makes any choices You know how could you be any different than the what the universe wants you to be and it's all one block universe So you don't have free will Don't answer the question at the level at which it wasn't asked So if God asked the question is there free will no there is no free will the universe asks a question there is no free will But if an individual asks a question right now then yes there is free will So a lot of these paradoxes resolve themselves philosophical paradoxes that people have been struggling with since the beginning of time when you just realize there you're you're answering them at a scale and time different than they were asked

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 问题在于你开始试图假装自己是宇宙来回答这个问题。你会说，嗯，在宇宙尺度上，大爆炸，粒子碰撞，没有人做任何选择。你知道，你怎么可能不同于宇宙想要你成为的样子？这全是一个块状宇宙（block universe）。所以你没有自由意志。不要在问题未被提出的层级上回答问题。所以如果上帝问“有自由意志吗”，不，没有自由意志；如果宇宙问这个问题，没有自由意志。但如果一个体此时此刻问这个问题，那么是的，有自由意志。所以当你意识到你是在用与提问时不同的尺度和时间来回答时，很多这些悖论，那些人们自古以来就在纠结的哲学悖论，就自然解决了。

章节 15：社会协作、AI与被误解的科技未来

📝 本节摘要：

本章记录了Naval在社会观念与科技认知上的重大更新。他坦承自己不再是极端的自由意志主义者，转而认为宗教和文化是解决人类“协作问题”的关键系统。在科技领域，他高度评价大语言模型（LLM）作为“自然语言计算机”的突破性，认为它让英语成为了编程语言，但他对AI的创造力持保留态度，并认为“超级人工智能”（ASI）是幻想。此外，他还对比了Tesla和Waymo的自动驾驶路线，认为尽管Waymo目前领先，但Tesla的纯视觉方案更具扩展性。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Speaking of updating beliefs is there anything that you've changed your mind around recently very recently I mean all the time Uh but are you talking about like philosophical existential things or like technological things yeah philosophical existential things or anything that comes to mind If there's anything that's front of mind where you go ah yeah that's a pretty big OS update

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 说到更新信念，最近有什么你改变主意的事情吗？非常最近的。我的意思是我一直在改变。呃，但你是说像哲学存在层面的，还是像技术层面的？是的，哲学存在层面的，或者任何你想到的事情。如果有什么是你脑海中最重要的，让你觉得“啊，是的，这是一个相当大的操作系统（OS）更新”。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Yeah I'm less lazy fair than I used to be on a societal level I think that culture and religion are good cooperating systems for humans And so if you want to operate in a high trust society you need to have sets of rules that people need to follow and obey so they get along even if they're you know one sizefits-all doesn't work for everybody Moved up a little bit from libertarian Yeah I think pure libertarians get out competed and die right they get overrun because they're every man for himself They can't coordinate They can't coordinate Exactly Right

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 是的，我在社会层面上不像以前那么信奉自由放任（laissez-faire，原文误拼为lazy fair）了。我认为文化和宗教是人类良好的协作系统。所以如果你想在一个高信任的社会中运作，你需要有一套人们需要遵循和服从的规则，这样他们才能和睦相处，即使你知道“一刀切”并不适合每个人。（Chris: 从自由意志主义稍微往前迈了一步？）是的。我认为纯粹的自由意志主义者会在竞争中出局并消亡，对吧，他们会被碾压，因为他们是各自为战。他们无法协作。（Chris: 他们无法协作。）完全正确。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um so the coordination problems right culture exists to solve fundamental coordination problems Religion solves coordination problems Ethnicity solves coordination problems historically Um and when you uh break down those coordination systems too fast and don't replace them with anything else you get societal breakdown So you can have very malfunctioning societies you know go to Japan versus go to any western city and you can see the difference being a a culture that's working and a culture that's not Um so I I think that that's like a a broader set of things that I've changed my mind on uh a fair bit I used to be much more lazy fair on that stuff let's put it that way

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，所以关于协作问题，对吧，文化的存在是为了解决根本性的协作问题。宗教解决协作问题。历史上种族也解决协作问题。呃，当你过快地打破这些协作系统，并且没有用其他东西来替代它们时，你会得到社会崩溃。所以你会看到非常失灵的社会。你知道，去日本对比去任何西方城市，你可以看到一个运转良好的文化和一个运转不良的文化的区别。呃，所以我认为这是我在很大程度上改变想法的一类更广泛的事情。我以前在那些东西上要自由放任得多，我们就这么说吧。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um what else have I changed my mind on i mean I think a modern AI is really cool I think it's but I think these are natural language computers Um they're starting to show evidence of kind of uh reasoning at some levels but I don't think they do creativity I think modern AI one of so just on that one of my favorite takes is from Dwash Patel and he says um uh if you gave any human on the planet 0.0 0 0 0.1% of the consumption that a LLM has Any LLM they would have come up with thousands of new ideas right give me one new idea one fundamental new idea that's been generated Yeah Like I'm big into poetry Every poem ever written by an LLM is garbage I think even their fiction writing is terrible Even the new GPT45 with all due respect to Sam and Crew uh I I think they're terrible terrible writers

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，我还在什么事情上改变了主意？我的意思是，我觉得现代 AI真的很酷。但我认为这些是“自然语言计算机”。呃，它们开始在某些层面上显示出某种推理的迹象，但我不认为它们具备创造力。我认为现代 AI……关于这一点，我最喜欢的观点之一来自 Dwarkesh Patel，他说，呃，如果你给地球上任何一个人提供任何大语言模型（LLM）所消耗的数据量的 0.00001%，他们会想出成千上万个新点子。对吧，（AI）给我一个新点子，一个被生成出来的根本性新点子？（Chris: 是的。）比如我很喜欢诗歌。每一首由 LLM 写的诗都是垃圾。我认为即使是它们的小说写作也很糟糕。即使是新的 GPT-4.5——恕我对 Sam 和他的团队不敬——呃，我认为它们是糟糕透顶的作家。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I find them really bad at summarizing They're really good at extrapolating you know paperwork um they're very bad at actually distilling the essence of something and what's important They don't have an opinions or a point of view But they're still unbelievably powerful breakthroughs They solve search They solve natural language computing They make English a programming language They solve driving They solve uh simple coding and backup coding They solve translation They solve transcription Um they are a fundamental breakthrough in computing It is a different way to program a computer rather than you explicitly speak its language and write the code and then run the data through it You just run enough data through it until it figures out how to write the program That's huge

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我发现它们真的很不擅长总结。它们真的很擅长推断，你知道，处理文书工作。呃，它们非常不擅长真正提取某物的本质和重要之处。它们没有意见或观点。但它们仍然是令人难以置信的强大突破。它们解决了搜索。它们解决了自然语言计算。它们让英语成为了一种编程语言。它们解决了驾驶。它们解决了呃简单的编码和辅助编码。它们解决了翻译。它们解决了转录。呃，它们是计算领域的根本性突破。这是一种不同的计算机编程方式：不再是你明确地讲它的语言、写代码然后运行数据，而是你只需运行足够的数据，直到它自己弄清楚如何编写程序。这是巨大的。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um but are they are they AGI not yet And I don't see a direct path from here to there Um maybe we'll have to solve a few more problems before that happens And I think ASI is a fantasy I don't think there's any such thing as uh artificial super intelligence where it has some kind of intelligence that humans can't fathom

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，但它们是 AGI（通用人工智能）吗？还不是。而且我看不到从这里到那里的直接路径。呃，也许在那发生之前我们还得解决几个问题。而且我认为 ASI（超级人工智能）是一个幻想。我不认为存在那种拥有人类无法理解的某种智能的“人工超级智能”。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: It's a different form of intelligence It's not and intelligence again like love or like happiness is this overloaded word that means many things to many people But by my definition where you know the true test is you get what you want out of life It doesn't even have a life It doesn't even want anything It's a different thing Um I do think it's unbelievably useful I'm glad that it exists You don't see it much yet in large scale production systems replacing humans because this tendency to hallucinate So you can't put it into anything mission critical confidently wrong one time out of 10 Correct And it doesn't even know when it's wrong Uh and maybe they'll get that one out of 10 down to one out of 100 But you'll kind of always want human oversight for critical critical things

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 它是一种不同形式的智能。它不是……再说一次，智能就像爱或幸福一样，是一个被过度使用的词，对不同的人意味着很多东西。但根据我的定义——你知道真正的测试是你从生活中得到了你想要的——它甚至没有生命，它甚至不想要任何东西。它是不同的东西。呃，我确实认为它非常有用，我很高兴它存在。你还没有看到它在大规模生产系统中取代人类，因为它有产生幻觉的倾向。所以你不能把它放到任何关键任务中。（Chris: 十次里有一次自信地出错。）正确。而且它甚至不知道自己什么时候错了。呃，也许他们会把那个十分之一降到百分之一。但对于极其关键的事情，你总是需要人类的监督。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: On Tesla versus Whimo would you bet on software or hardware for self-driving yeah So the I think Tesla's in the stronger longer term position but it's hard to argue with what's working right now And Whimo is working right now So I would not underestimate them because there's a learning curve that you go through when you actually deploy something And Whimo is way ahead in that regard But Tesla's camera only approach if it works uh is a superior It's much more scalable and Tesla knows how to print cars right they can just mass manufacture cars But I think I think they'll both be around They'll both be fine It's everybody else who doesn't have a self-driving vehicle that's screwed

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 关于 Tesla 和 Waymo，在自动驾驶上你会赌软件还是硬件？

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的。所以我认为 Tesla 处于更强的长期地位，但你很难反驳目前正在起作用的东西，而 Waymo 现在就在起作用。所以我不会低估他们，因为当你实际部署某样东西时，你会经历一条学习曲线，而在那方面 Waymo 遥遥领先。但是 Tesla 的纯视觉方案（camera only approach）如果行得通，呃，它是更优越的。它的可扩展性强得多，而且 Tesla 知道如何“打印”汽车，对吧，他们可以直接大规模制造汽车。但我认为，我认为它们都会存在，它们都会过得很好。完蛋的是其他所有没有自动驾驶汽车的人。

章节 16：生育率危机与反常识育儿经

📝 本节摘要：

本章涵盖了 Naval 对生育率下降和育儿哲学的独特见解。他认为人口减少并非末日，而是女性独立和生活富足带来的选择结果，且经济激励最终会通过“斯科特·亚当斯定律”解决这一缓慢移动的灾难。在育儿方面，他猛烈抨击了违背进化常识的“IYI”（Intellectual Yet Idiot，知识分子却像个白痴）科学，如反对同床睡（co-sleeping）或推崇“让孩子哭个够”（cry it out）。他主张回归自然直觉，给予孩子无条件的爱与自主权（Agency），并通过解释底层原理（如细菌理论）而非死记硬背来教育孩子。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: You mentioned uh kids there and you had a tweet that said "I'm not convinced that declining fertility needs to be proactively fought."

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你刚才提到了孩子，你发过一条推文说：“我不认为我们需要主动去对抗生育率下降的问题。”

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I forgot that one You're going to have to I'm I dug deep Um why well I mean think back like what was it 30 years ago 20 years ago everybody was saying overpopulation of the earth is going to be a problem Malthusian ending we're going to have too many people And now all of a sudden we're going to have too few people So part of it is just the doomerism meme is always alive and well right or it just gets repackaged

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我都忘了那条了。你挖得真深。呃，为什么？我的意思是回想一下，大概30年前、20年前，每个人都在说地球人口过剩将是一个问题，马尔萨斯式的结局，我们要有太多人了。而现在突然之间，我们要有太少人了。所以这部分只是“末日论”模因（doomerism meme）总是生生不息，对吧，或者是它被重新包装了。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Now what is the actual fertility problem right well people are having less kids Are they having less kids because there's a disease was there a virus did they lose their fertility the microplastics in the testicles right no it's people are having less kids because they're choosing to have less kids right women have gotten emancipation independence in the workforce and they're making more money Um people don't need kids as insurance policies They have less kids Maybe they're living hedonistic lives God bless them right they want to have more fun They want to have less kids I don't see the act of choosing to have less kids as a problem

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 现在，实际的生育问题是什么？人们生的孩子变少了。是因为有疾病吗？有病毒吗？他们失去生育能力了吗？睾丸里的微塑料？不，是因为人们选择少生孩子。对吧，女性获得了更多的解放、在职场中的独立性，她们赚了更多的钱。呃，人们不再需要孩子作为保险单。他们少生孩子，也许他们在过享乐主义的生活。上帝保佑他们，对吧，他们想玩得更开心。他们想少生孩子。我不认为“选择少生孩子”这一行为本身是个问题。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Okay so let's move one level up Uh it's because of retirees It's because a large percentage of the population is essentially retiring at the guaranteed age of 65 or 70 thanks social security And so they need other people to pay for it They need more workers in the workforce And if the workforce is shrinking then you have a small number of people Exactly who are supporting a large number of retirees

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 好的，让我们上升一个层面。这是因为退休人员。这是因为很大比例的人口基本上在65或70岁的保障年龄退休，多亏了社会保障。所以他们需要其他人来为此买单。他们需要更多的劳动力。如果劳动力在萎缩，那么你就只有少数人……（Chris: 没错。）……在供养大量的退休人员。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I think it'll work itself out right the Scott Adams has this great law which calls the Adams law of slowmoving disasters When disasters are very slowm moving like peak oil or global warming or population collapse and everyone can kind of see them coming economics and society as a force solve them because enough individual people has incentives to go solve them So I don't know exactly how it gets solved but I think it could get solved in various ways

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我认为这会自然解决的。Scott Adams 有一个伟大的定律，叫“亚当斯缓慢灾难定律”（Adams’ law of slow-moving disasters）。当灾难移动得非常缓慢时，比如石油峰值、全球变暖或人口崩溃，每个人都能某种程度上看到它们的到来，经济和社会作为一种力量会解决它们，因为有足够多的个人有动力去解决它们。所以我不知道确切会如何解决，但我认为可以通过各种方式解决。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: what's your experience been kids make your life better in every possible way If you want to if you want an automatic built-in meaning to life have kids Uh and I think there are these bad psych studies like most psych studies unfortunately that say that people are unhappy when they have kids Yeah it's because you're catching in the middle of changing a diaper and you're saying like "Are you glad you had kids or not?" Or or they don't even say that They say "Are you happy or not?" And they say "No I'm not happy right now." But what they don't realize is that person has found something more important than being happy in the moment They found meaning And the meaning comes from kids And if you ask parents do you regret having kids i think it would be 99 to1 against you know it would be "No I don't regret having kids I love having kids I'm so glad I had kids."

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你的经历是怎样的？

[Naval Ravikant]: 孩子让你的生活在各方面都变得更好。如果你想要，如果你想要生活中有一种自动的、内置的意义，那就生孩子。呃，我认为有一些糟糕的心理学研究——不幸的是大多数心理学研究都是如此——说人们生了孩子后不快乐。是的，那是因为你在他们换尿布换到一半时抓住了他们，问：“你生了孩子高兴吗？”或者他们甚至不那样问，他们问：“你现在快乐吗？”他们说：“不，我现在不快乐。”但研究者没意识到的是，那个人找到了比当下的快乐更重要的东西。他们找到了意义。而意义来自于孩子。如果你问父母，你后悔生孩子吗？我认为反对比例会是99比1。你知道，答案会是：“不，我不后悔生孩子，我爱生孩子，我很高兴我生了孩子。”

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Given that you've been thinking more about child rearing kids what do you hope that your kids learn from their childhood

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 既然你一直在更多地思考抚养孩子的问题，你希望你的孩子从童年中学到什么？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: they should just be happy and do what they want I don't I don't I don't have particular goals in mind for them I think that's a that's another route to unhappiness Having That's different though right than learn versus goals It's not necessarily what do they want what what do you want them to want out of life like what is it that you had that idea around your number one job as a parent is to provide unconditional love to your kids Yeah that's it Right So I can be loved or I am loved unconditionally Is that one of the things i want my kids to feel unconditionally loved and I want them to have high self-esteem Mhm As a consequence of that but I don't get to choose any All I get to choose is my output I can output love I can't choose what they feel

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 他们应该快乐，做他们想做的事。我不……我不……我心里对他们没有特定的目标。我认为那是通往不快乐的另一条路。

[Chris Williamson]: 那不一样，对吧？学习和目标是两码事。不一定是他们想要什么，而是你希望他们从生活中想要什么？比如你以前有个观点，作为父母你的首要工作是给孩子提供无条件的爱。

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的，就是那个。

[Chris Williamson]: 对。所以我可以被爱，或者我是被无条件爱着的。那是其中之一吗？

[Naval Ravikant]: 我希望我的孩子感到被无条件地爱着，我希望他们有高自尊。嗯，那是结果，但我不能选择任何结果。我能选择的只有我的输出。我可以输出爱，但我不能选择他们的感受。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And downstream from that there should be freedom There should be a degree of freedom that comes from the self-esteem that comes from the unconditionality They should make their own mistakes and learn their own lessons and uh have their own desires and fulfill them as is appropriate Uh I like any parent I wouldn't want them to be hurt I wouldn't want them to be unhappy But I cannot control these things

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 在那之后应该是自由。应该有某种程度的自由，来自于自尊，来自于无条件的爱。他们应该犯自己的错误，吸取自己的教训，呃，拥有自己的欲望并适当地实现它们。呃，像任何父母一样，我不希望他们受伤害，我不希望他们不快乐。但我无法控制这些事情。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: A friend of mine uh Parsa on uh on Air Chat uh he had a great saying He said uh he wants his uh children to be quick to learn and hard to kill

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 我有个朋友，呃，Airchat 上的 Parsa，他有一句很好的名言。他说，呃，他希望他的孩子“学得快，且命硬”（quick to learn and hard to kill）。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Uh you replied to my friend Rob Henderson He was talking about um how kids fall asleep more quickly when they're being carried and uh you said cry it out and co-sleeping is dangerous What's IYI science

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 呃，你回复了我的朋友 Rob Henderson。他在谈论呃，孩子在被抱着的时候入睡得更快。然后你说，“哭声免疫法”（cry it out）和认为“同床睡”（co-sleeping）危险是……什么是 IYI 科学？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: iy is Nim TB He talk about intellectual yet idiot These are people who are overeducated and they deny like basic common sense Okay Uh so there's a lot of that that goes on in child rearing uh thanks to really bad studies uh and and bad public medical directives So for example you know uh a few uh a few parents you maybe they're drunk or they're high or they're just other issues and you know they roll over their kid when they're sleeping the kid suffocates or they neglect their kid and then is that co-sleeping having them in the bed Yeah Exactly Or or there you know the the modern proclamation And so because of that they say "Well don't co-sleep with your kids." Well the kids in every society through all of human history co-slept with their parents Where else do you think they were sleeping they weren't houses in multiple rooms

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: IYI 是纳西姆·塔勒布（Nassim Taleb）提出的。他说的是“知识分子却像个白痴”（Intellectual Yet Idiot）。这些人受过过度教育，却否认基本的常识。好的。呃，所以在育儿方面有很多这样的情况，呃，多亏了那些糟糕的研究，呃，以及糟糕的公共医疗指令。例如，你知道，呃，有几个父母，也许他们喝醉了，或者嗑嗨了，或者有其他问题，你知道，他们在睡觉时压到了孩子，孩子窒息了；或者他们忽视了孩子。

[Chris Williamson]: 那是同床睡吗？把他们放在床上？

[Naval Ravikant]: 是的，没错。或者你知道现在的公告。因为那个，他们说：“好吧，不要和你的孩子同床睡。”但是人类历史上每个社会的孩子都和父母同床睡。你以为他们还能睡在哪里？以前可没有多房间的房子。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Co-sleeping has been around since the dawn of time So has uh feeding kids cow milk when or goat milk when breast milk is runs out or is not available Um yet we're told formula you know made with soy and and and corn syrup which was invented recently is somehow better than uh cow milk And cow milk can be dangerous for your kids and co-sleeping is dangerous for your kids and cry it out is the right answer All of that is nonsense

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 自从时间开始，同床睡就一直存在。同样存在的还有呃，当母乳用完或不可用时，给孩子喂牛奶或羊奶。呃，然而我们被告知，用最近才发明的大豆和玉米糖浆制成的配方奶，不知何故比呃牛奶更好。牛奶对你的孩子可能是危险的，同床睡对你的孩子是危险的，而“哭声免疫法”（cry it out）是正确的答案。所有这些都是胡扯。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And and to me the idea that like you're going to let your kid cry it out I get why that's done for practical reasons so that you know you can get some sleep and you can go to work in the morning but the reality is when you let the kid cry it out you're letting the kid ball until it finally gives up I mean the kid left by itself to cry it out in the wild It's going to get it's going to get eaten right it's going to get eaten by a tiger Um so this kid is starting off on the wrong foundation

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 对我来说，你要让你的孩子“哭个够”的想法……我理解出于实际原因这样做，这样你知道你可以睡会儿觉，早上可以去上班。但现实是，当你让孩子哭个够时，你是让孩子一直嚎啕大哭直到他最终放弃。我的意思是，在野外，如果孩子被留下来独自哭泣，它会被吃的，对吧，它会被老虎吃的。呃，所以这个孩子从一开始就建立在错误的基础上了。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: But I think we just go through these you know the these IYI beliefs these intellectual beliefs come from people who uh take a little bit of knowledge and extrapolate it too far They think we know more than we know due to recent scientific studies and these are junk science

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 但我认为我们就这样经历了这些……你知道，这些 IYI 信念，这些知识分子的信念，来自于那些呃，掌握了一点点知识却将其推演得太远的人。他们因为最近的科学研究而认为我们知道的比实际多，而这些是垃圾科学。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: It It's funny when uh my wife and I had our first baby I remember you know at the hospital sorry the first one was natural birth um at the birthing center We we went home I was like "There you go That's it." And we're like what do we do where's the instruction manual you take them home and then you relax and you realize actually instincts are pretty good You know if the kid cries check to see if they clean feed them all that It's like your your basic instincts are actually very very good

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 有趣的是，当呃我和我妻子生第一个孩子时……我记得，你知道在医院——抱歉，第一个是顺产，呃在分娩中心。我们回家了。我就像：“这就行了？就这样？”我们就像，我们该做什么？说明书在哪儿？你把他们带回家，然后你放松下来，你意识到实际上直觉非常管用。你知道，如果孩子哭了，检查一下他们是否干净，喂他们，就那些。就像你的基本直觉实际上非常非常好。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So early on with my kids I tried to focus on teaching them you know basic explanatory theories as opposed to having them memorize things That's just the most the most nol solution... But another one is that a lot of the rules that you teach kids have to do with hygiene right you must brush your teeth you know cover your mouth when you cough Um you know clean up after yourself Don't touch that Wash your hands after you do this um don't eat food off the floor right but all of these are subsumed under the germ theory of disease right so if you instead go on YouTube and show them videos of germs or if you have them look under a microscope at anything they're like "Ah they can infer what's going Yeah there's creepy crawies everywhere and I got to watch out for them."

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以在孩子还小的时候，我试图专注于教他们，你知道，基本的解释性理论，而不是让他们死记硬背。那是最根本的解决方案……许多你教给孩子的规则都与卫生有关，对吧？你必须刷牙，你知道，咳嗽时捂住嘴。呃，你知道，自己收拾干净，别碰那个，做完这个后洗手，呃，别吃掉在地上的食物。对吧，但所有这些都包含在“细菌致病理论”（germ theory of disease）之下。对吧，所以如果你反而去 YouTube 上给他们看细菌的视频，或者让他们在显微镜下看任何东西，他们就会像：“啊，（他们能推断出发生了什么）。是的，到处都是可怕的爬虫，我得小心它们。”

章节 17：文化战争、权力与暴力的本质

📝 本节摘要：

本章深入剖析了文化战争的现状与历史动力。Naval 认为，虽然左派一度占据制度高地，但随着 Elon Musk 等超级个体的崛起，战局已变为“公平对决”。他对比了历史的“伟人理论”与“大势理论”，指出科技杠杆正在让个体（Great Man）拥有前所未有的力量，这也导致了财富游戏的赢家通吃与身份游戏中的“失败者”激增。最后，他解构了民主的本质，指出投票权源于物理力量的分配，而非相反。他冷峻地断言，所有社会秩序最终都由暴力（“红牙利爪的自然”）支撑，试图用政治权力压制物理力量的结构注定是不稳定的。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: I remember you saying just thinking about sort of future and culture and stuff like that I remember you saying that the left had won the culture war and now they're just driving around shooting the survivors right after the last 6 months of change that we've seen and sort of where we're at at the moment what do you think the future of the culture war looks like

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 我记得你说过——考虑到未来和文化之类的东西——我记得你说过左派已经赢得了文化战争，现在他们只是开着车四处射杀幸存者。对吧？在经历了过去6个月的变化以及考虑到我们目前的处境，你认为文化战争的未来会是什么样？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: it's not over yet Um they definitely won earlier rounds They took over institutions I think now it's much more of a fair fight Um where you have people like Elon you know kind of supporting uh so so there there's these different forces through history right historians will argue about this Uh but there's a theory of the great man of history thing where it's like oh you have the Einsteins you have the Teslas you have the um the Jangaskhans and the Caesars right they determine the flow of history

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 还没结束。呃，他们肯定赢了早期的几轮。他们接管了机构。我认为现在更像是一场公平的战斗。呃，你有像 Elon 这样的人在某种程度上支持……所以历史上有这些不同的力量，对吧，历史学家会对此争论不休。呃，有一种“历史伟人理论”（Great Man Theory），就像你有爱因斯坦、你有特斯拉、你有呃成吉思汗和凯撒，对吧，他们决定了历史的走向。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And then there's the other uh point of view that no there are these massive forces at play you know demographics and geography and so on and then the particular great man doesn't matter they just come and go Napoleon doesn't matter they would have been somebody else uh the specific names are not important and because of kind of the leftist turn that our institutions took in the last few uh decades they now only subscribe to the great forces theory of history not the great man theory of history but I think now we're seeing the two play out where you're seeing you know Trump and Elon and other individuals is rising up and saying no we resist

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 然后还有另一种呃观点，认为不，是有这些巨大的力量在起作用，你知道，人口统计学、地理学等等。具体的伟人并不重要，他们只是来来去去。拿破仑不重要，会有别人代替他，呃，具体的名字不重要。而且因为我们的机构在过去几十年里呃转向左派，他们现在只信奉历史的“大势理论”（Great Forces Theory），而不信奉“伟人理论”。但我认为现在我们看到了这两者的博弈，你看到你知道，特朗普和 Elon 以及其他个体正在崛起并说：“不，我们要反抗。”

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: And um I think that unfortunately and so the battle between kind of these these these collectivists and great forces versus individuals it's as old as humanity itself And and it is fundamental to the species We are not a completely individualistic species You know no man is an island A single person can't do anything by themselves But we're also not a Borg We're not a beehive We're not an ant colony We're not all just drones marching along So which is it we we're somewhere in the middle And the human race is always kind of bouncing between the two

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 而且呃，我认为不幸的是，这种集体主义者、“大势”与个体之间的战斗，就像人类本身一样古老。而且这对这个物种来说是根本性的。我们不是一个完全个人主义的物种。你知道，没有人是一座孤岛。单个人无法独自做任何事。但我们也不是博格人（Borg，科幻作品中的蜂巢思维种族）。我们不是蜂巢，我们不是蚁群。我们不全是只会行军的工蜂。所以到底是哪个？我们在中间的某个地方。人类总是某种程度上在这两者之间摇摆。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: We like strong leaders We like to be led Um we like to coordinate our forces and and and mass and and do things Uh but at the same time we're also all individuals and willing to break away and willing to do our own thing and everyone's always fighting to be a leader and there's always status games going on So u we're there's a pendulum that's always swinging back and forth And in modern economics the way that manifests is between sort of Marxism and capitalism right marxism is like from each according to his ability to each according to his needs We're all equal There's a millennial project We're all going to be equal in the end And and you know don't try and stand out but do what's good for everybody

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我们喜欢强有力的领导者。我们喜欢被领导。呃，我们喜欢协调我们的力量和呃大众去做事。呃，但同时我们也是个体，愿意脱离，愿意做我们自己的事，每个人也总是在争当领导者，总是有身份游戏在进行。所以呃，有一个钟摆总是在来回摆动。在现代经济学中，这表现为马克思主义和资本主义之间的某种形式。对吧，马克思主义就像是“各尽所能，按需分配”。我们都是平等的。有一个千禧年计划。我们最终都会平等。而且你知道，不要试图脱颖而出，要做对大家都有好处的事。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Um and there's a religious aspect to it And then the the capitalist individualist is like libertarian Every man for himself You just each do what you want and it'll work out for the greater good That's Adam Smith You know the invisible hand of the market will feed you the baker should bake and the butcher should butcher and the candlestick maker should make candlesticks and it'll all work out Each person does their best and they trade and so which is it which which which theory is correct and I think there's always going to be a battle between the two and I think the interesting thing is what's going on there's a modern flavor to it which changes it

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 呃，这其中有宗教的成分。然后资本主义个人主义者就像是自由意志主义者：每个人为自己。你们每个人做你想做的，结果会对更大的利益有好处。那是亚当·斯密。你知道，市场看不见的手会养活你。面包师应该烤面包，屠夫应该屠宰，烛台制造者应该做烛台，一切都会好起来的。每个人都尽力而为并进行交易。那么是哪一个呢？哪一个……哪一个理论是正确的？我认为这两者之间总是会有一场战斗。而且我认为有趣的是，正在发生的事情有一种现代风味（modern flavor），这改变了局势。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: The modern flavor is that the individual is getting more powerful because they're becoming more leverage So someone like an Elon Musk can have the leverage of tens of thousands of brilliant engineers and producers working for him He can have factories of robots manufacturing things He can have hundreds of billions of dollars of capital behind him and he can project himself through media to hundreds of millions of people That is more power than any individual could have had historically So the great men of history are becoming greater

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 这种现代风味是：个体正在变得更强大，因为他们获得了更多的杠杆。所以像 Elon Musk 这样的人可以拥有成千上万聪明工程师和制作人为他工作的杠杆。他可以拥有制造东西的机器人工厂。他背后可能有数千亿美元的资本，他可以通过媒体将自己投射给数亿人。这比历史上任何个人所能拥有的权力都要大。所以历史上的伟人正在变得更加伟大。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: That said that same leverage is increasing the gap between the halves and have nots So in the wealth game more people are winning overall and the average is going up But in the status game there are essentially more losers There are more invisible men and women who are getting nothing out of life and have no leverage Relatively speaking Objectively speaking they might be better off They still have phones and they still have TVs and they're not absolutist creatures though We're relative creatures Correct And so to the extent that we're relatives creatures there are more losers than winners And in a democracy those people will outnumber the winners and they will vote the winners down

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 也就是说，同样的杠杆也在拉大贫富差距。所以在财富游戏中，总体上更多的人在赢，平均水平在上升。但在身份游戏中，本质上有更多的输家。有更多隐形的男男女女，他们从生活中什么也得不到，没有任何杠杆。相对而言是这样。客观上讲他们可能过得更好了，他们还有手机，还有电视。（Chris: 但我们不是绝对主义生物，我们是相对主义生物。）正确。所以既然我们是相对主义生物，输家就比赢家多。而在民主制度中，这些人在数量上会超过赢家，他们会通过投票把赢家拉下马。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Yep Um and so that's the battle that kind of goes on and the democracy has gotten very broad And so one of my other quips is that um it's not the right to vote that gives you power it's power that gives you the right to vote So we've confused the two So what happened was you know voting started as a way for people who had power to divide up the power not fight amongst themselves The winners of the revolution the winners of the war the people in the House of Lords and the House of Commons they divide up power amongst themselves to say "Hey we have all the money We have the power We are the knights We have the swords We have the warriors We could kill everybody but we don't want to just fight each other all day long We don't have to be Game of Thrones forever So we're going to divide up power by voting among ourselves."

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 是的。呃，所以这就是正在进行的战斗，民主已经变得非常广泛。所以我还有一个金句是：呃，不是投票权给了你权力，是权力给了你投票权。所以我们把这两者搞混了。发生的事情是，你知道，投票起初是拥有权力的人为了瓜分权力而不是内斗的一种方式。革命的赢家、战争的赢家、上议院和下议院的人，他们在自己中间瓜分权力，说：“嘿，我们有所有的钱，我们有权力，我们是骑士，我们有剑，我们有战士。我们可以杀光所有人，但我们不想整天互相打仗。我们不必永远演《权力的游戏》。所以我们要通过在我们自己中间投票来瓜分权力。”

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: But then as society goes on and becomes more and more peaceful that franchise for voting gets spread It gets spread to people who don't have land who don't have power who may not be able to inflict physical violence And then eventually you get to the point where everybody's voting Everybody's voting and everybody was voting for candy and fairies and you know all the free things in life Uh and then eventually people start voting to oppress each other The 51% in in any domain vote to oppress the 49s the tyranny the majority

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 但随着社会发展，变得越来越和平，这种投票权被扩散了。它扩散到了那些没有土地、没有权力、可能无法施加身体暴力的人身上。最终你到了每个人都在投票的地步。每个人都在投票，每个人都在为糖果、仙女和你知道生活中所有免费的东西投票。呃，最终人们开始投票互相压迫。在任何领域，51%的人投票压迫49%的人，多数人的暴政。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: But not all of them are willing to back that up with physical power And so you can end up in a situation where people who don't have physical power are using the institutions of the state to control the people who do have physical power as a simple example taking the United States the people who don't have guns voting to disarm the people that do have guns right well if the people who do have guns get coordinated and care enough you can't do that right so I think eventually these societal structures are unstable they break down and they break down because eventually the people who have the power and say no wait a minute you don't get to vote you you only got to vote because you had power and now you don't have power and you're somehow trying to vote

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 但并非所有人都愿意用物理力量来支持这一点。所以你可能会陷入这样一种境地：没有物理力量的人利用国家机构来控制那些有物理力量的人。举个美国的简单例子，那些没有枪的人投票去解除那些有枪的人的武装。对吧，嗯，如果那些有枪的人协调起来并且足够在意，你是做不到的。对吧，所以我认为最终这些社会结构是不稳定的，它们会崩溃。它们崩溃是因为最终那些拥有权力的人会说：“不，等一下，你没资格投票。你当初能投票只是因为你有权力，而现在你没有权力，却不知怎么地试图投票。”

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: all of nature all of society all of capitalism all of human endeavors are underpinned by physical violence And that is very hard truth to swallow and hard to get away from Nature is read in tooth and claw If you don't fight you don't survive You don't live you die And that's true of everything alive today And humans are no different So giving up physical power and then thinking you can exercise political power fails Which is why every communist revolution which is all about equality and kumbaya and brothers and sisters end up being run by a bunch of thugs Because if you don't have a way to divide up the wealth based on merit then it's always going to be based on power and influence The thugs with the guns always win in the end

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所有的自然、所有的社会、所有的资本主义、所有的人类努力，都是由物理暴力（physical violence）支撑的。这是一个很难下咽的真相，也是很难逃避的。自然界是“红牙利爪”（red in tooth and claw）的。如果你不战斗，你就无法生存。你不活，你就死。今天活着的每样东西都是如此，人类也不例外。所以放弃物理力量然后认为你可以行使政治权力，这是行不通的。这就是为什么每一次共产主义革命——那些关于平等、欢聚一堂（kumbaya）、兄弟姐妹的革命——最终都由一群暴徒统治。因为如果你没有办法基于功绩（merit）来分配财富，那么它总是会基于权力和影响力来分配。带枪的暴徒最终总是赢家。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So the question is just can you keep the thugs and the with the guns paid and happy and successful society where you're allocating based on merit because if you can't then you do it based on power So I do think that this battle is not over but that's because it it never stopped It's always been there from day one It will continue

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以问题仅仅是：你能否让那些带枪的暴徒得到报酬并保持快乐，维持一个基于功绩分配的成功社会？因为如果你不能，那么就会基于权力进行分配。所以我确实认为这场战斗还没有结束，但那是因它从未停止过。它从第一天起就一直存在。它将继续下去。

章节 18：注意力的货币、未来预测与真正的Alpha

📝 本节摘要：

在最后一章中，Naval 提出了“注意力是生命真正的货币”这一核心观点。他认为金钱和时间都只是注意力的载体，我们应当小心不要被新闻和“模因病毒”掠夺了这一稀缺资源。随后，他给出了三个关于未来的反直觉预测：现代医学（尤其是生物学）仍处于“石器时代”；战争的未来是“自主子弹”（无人机）；GLP-1激动剂（如Ozempic）将成为继抗生素之后最重要的药物，不仅解决肥胖，还可能解决成瘾问题。最后，他重新定义了“Alpha男性”：不是先吃的人，而是先照顾部落、最后才吃的人。访谈以典型的 Naval 风格结束：“Expect nothing（别抱任何期待）”。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Is it a battle to not care about the news in an age of news saturation all of this stuff headlines 24 hours a day streamed directly into your consciousness through a device in your pocket You know a lot of what we've spoken about today is freedom Freedom from having to think about things or care about things that you do not have control over or that you shouldn't or that you don't want to And yet people are just like submerged up to the bottom of their nostrils basically drowning in worry So how Yeah Is it is it a battle to sort of stay out of the news when you're saturated in it

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 在这个新闻饱和的时代，不关心新闻是一场战斗吗？所有这些头条新闻，每天24小时通过你口袋里的设备直接流进你的意识。你知道，我们今天谈论的很多内容都是关于自由——不用去想或关心那些你无法控制、不该关心或不想关心的事情的自由。然而人们就像是被淹没到了鼻孔底下，基本上是在担忧中溺水。所以，当你在新闻中饱和时，置身事外是一场战斗吗？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: yeah I mean as you're saying the human brain has not evolved to handle all the world's emergencies breaking in real time and you can't care about everything and you'll go insane if you try Um doesn't mean you shouldn't care at all There's no should I mean if you want to care go ahead and care I would just say that you're probably better off only caring about things that are local or things that you can affect So if you really care about something that's in the news then by all means care about it but make a difference Go do something about it uh and make sure that it's your overwhelming desire and you don't have five other desires at the same time

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 是的，我的意思是正如你所说，人类的大脑并没有进化到能处理世界上所有实时爆发的紧急情况。你不能关心所有事情，如果你尝试这样做，你会发疯的。呃，这不意味着你不应该关心任何事。没有“应该”。我的意思是如果你想关心，那就去关心。我只是说，你最好只关心那些本地的、或者你能影响的事情。所以如果你真的关心新闻里的某件事，那就一定要关心，但要有所作为。去做点什么。呃，并确保那是你压倒性的欲望，而且你没有同时拥有其他五个欲望。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: You had to take about um that the most fundamental resource in your life is not time it's attention That's right I used to think you know the currency of life right people think it's money and yes money is important and it does let you trade certain things for time but it doesn't really buy you time Ask Warren Buffett how much time money can buy you or Michael Bloomberg They're you know rich as Scrooge and and Chris but they can't buy more time right brian Johnson notwithstanding Um so you can't trade money for time Money is not the real currency of life And time itself doesn't even mean that much because as we talked about before a lot of time can be wasted because you're not really present for it You're not paying attention So the real currency of life is attention It's what you choose to pay attention to and and and what you do about it

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 你曾提到，你生命中最根本的资源不是时间，而是注意力。

[Naval Ravikant]: 没错。我以前认为……你知道，人们认为生命的货币是金钱。是的，钱很重要，它确实能让你用某些东西换取时间，但它并不能真正买到时间。去问问沃伦·巴菲特或迈克尔·布隆伯格，钱能买到多少时间。他们富得流油，但他们买不到更多的时间，对吧？Brian Johnson 除外（笑）。呃，所以你不能用钱换时间。钱不是生命真正的货币。而时间本身也没那么重要，因为正如我们之前谈到的，很多时间会被浪费，因为你并没有真正活在当下，你没有集中注意力。所以生命真正的货币是注意力。是你选择关注什么，以及你对此做什么。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: One of my friends has a a question his equivalent of uh Peter Thiel's question of uh what is it that you believe that most people would disagree with his is what do you think is currently ignored by the media but will be studied by historians you're asking me that question right now What do I think is ignored by the media but will be studied by historians

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 我有个朋友有一个问题，相当于彼得·蒂尔（Peter Thiel）那个“你相信什么大多数人不同意的事情”的问题。他的问题是：你认为目前被媒体忽视但将来会被历史学家研究的事情是什么？

[Naval Ravikant]: 你现在是在问我这个问题吗？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: Two things that I pay attention to um that I don't think uh a lot of people do pay attention to Well there's a couple One is I think just how bad modern medicine is I think people just put a lot more faith in modern medicine than is warranted... We don't have many good explanatory theories in biology Um we have germ theory disease We have um evolution we have uh cell theory we have DNA genetics... and not much else Everything else is rules of thumb memorization A affects B because affects C affects D but we don't understand the underlying explanation... So biology is still in a very sorry state and because we are not allowed to take risk that might kill people Um we just don't experiment enough in biology... So I think we're still in the stone age when it comes to biology and we got a long ways to go

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 有两件事我关注，但我认为呃很多人并没有关注。第一，我认为现代医学有多糟糕。我认为人们对现代医学的信任超过了它应得的程度……我们在生物学上没有太多好的解释性理论。呃，我们有细菌致病论，我们有呃进化论，我们有呃细胞学说，我们有 DNA 遗传学……除此之外没多少了。其他一切都是经验法则、死记硬背：A 影响 B，因为 B 影响 C，C 影响 D，但我们不理解底层的解释……所以生物学仍然处于非常可悲的状态。而且因为我们不被允许承担可能致人死亡的风险，呃，我们在生物学上的实验远远不够……所以我认为在生物学方面我们仍处于石器时代，我们还有很长的路要走。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I think uh another uh another thing that we'll look back on is I think we we still continue to underestimate how important drones are going to be in warfare The future of all warfare is drones There will be nothing else on the battlefield Um because I think of the end state of drones as autonomous bullets Not even guided autonomous like they're self-directed Uh and so if that's the future we're headed towards... why would you have an armed force that's there's going to be no there's there's going to be no aircraft carriers there's going to be no tanks there's going to be no infantry men there's just going to be autonomous bullets Buy autonomous bullets against your autonomous bullets Whichever ones win the other side just surrenders cuz it's over

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我认为呃另一件我们会回顾的事情是，我认为我们仍然低估了无人机在战争中的重要性。所有战争的未来都是无人机。战场上将没有别的东西。呃，因为我认为无人机的终极状态是“自主子弹”（autonomous bullets）。甚至不是制导的，是自主的，它们是自我导向的。呃，所以如果我们正朝着那个未来前进……你为什么还要有一支武装力量？将不会有航空母舰，将不会有坦克，将不会有步兵，只会有自主子弹。买自主子弹对抗你的自主子弹。哪一方赢了，另一方就投降，因为结束了。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: I think a a third piece that is going to be uh kind of unexpected is the GLP1s which I know you and I have privately discussed before I think these are the most breakthrough drugs since antibiotics Um they're probably more important than statins They're sort of miracle drugs... Um and I think they're going to bend the curve on health care costs... This is a class of drugs that prevents you from taking other drugs into your body It prevents you from taking uh you know too much sugar too many calories in an era of abundance prevents you from smoking prevents you from even uh there's an organization called Casper that is now doing a study on heroin addictions and they're showing that this can lower opioid overdoses and heroin addiction

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 我认为第三件呃有点出乎意料的事情是 GLP-1 药物（如司美格鲁肽），我知道我们私下讨论过。我认为这些是自抗生素以来最具突破性的药物。呃，它们可能比他汀类药物更重要。它们算是奇迹药物……呃，我认为它们将扭转医疗成本的曲线……这是一类防止你摄入其他药物到体内的药物。它防止你在一个物质丰富的时代摄入呃太多的糖、太多的卡路里，防止你吸烟，甚至防止你呃……有一个叫 Casper 的组织正在做关于海洛因成瘾的研究，他们表明这可以降低阿片类药物过量和海洛因成瘾。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Is there an advantage to starting out as a loser uh absolutely Yeah Yeah Cuz if you're because if you're a loser then you'll want to be a winner and then you'll develop all the characteristics that will help you be a you know quote unquote winner in life That said I wouldn't sentence my kids to it Like I don't think you can artificially do that

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 一开始是个“失败者”（loser）有优势吗？

[Naval Ravikant]: 呃，绝对有。是的。是的。因为如果你是个失败者，那你就会想成为赢家，然后你就会发展出所有那些能帮助你成为——你知道，所谓的——人生赢家的特质。话虽如此，我不会判我的孩子去当失败者。我不认为你可以人为地那样做。

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: So when you have no resources you're struggling to take care of yourself And at that point it's good to be selfish cuz you can't save somebody else if you can't even save yourself... So the next thing you do is you go and you have a family and you take care of your family Take care of that tribe Then you take care of your extended family... And then if you have more resources beyond that then you go take care of your local tribe You take care of your people Um you start trying to do some good for the world And if you have more resource than that you go take care of an even bigger tribe And that's how you earn both respect and self-confidence and you live up to your potential... And that's what an alpha male to me is An alpha male is not the one who gets to eat first The alpha male eats last The alpha male feeds everybody else first and then gets to eat last And they do that out of their own self-respect and pride And society rewards them by calling them an alpha and giving them status

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 所以当你没有资源时，你在努力照顾自己。在那时自私是好的，因为如果你连自己都救不了，你也没法救别人……所以接下来你要做的就是组建家庭，照顾你的家庭。照顾那个部落。然后你照顾你的大家庭……如果你有更多的资源，那你就去照顾你的本地部落。你照顾你的人民。呃，你开始试图为世界做点好事。如果你有比那更多的资源，你就去照顾一个更大的部落。这就是你赢得尊重和自信、发挥潜能的方式……这对我来说才是“Alpha 男性”。Alpha 男性不是那个先吃的人。Alpha 男性最后吃。Alpha 男性先喂饱其他所有人，然后最后才吃。他们这样做是出于自己的自尊和骄傲。而社会通过称他们为 Alpha 并给予他们地位来奖励他们。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: Naval I really appreciate you Uh I hope that this has lived up to whatever weird daydreams you've been having Um what have you got coming up what can people expect from you over the next however long

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: Naval，我真的很感激你。呃，我希望这次访谈没有辜负你那些奇怪的白日梦。呃，你接下来有什么计划？在接下来的日子里，人们可以期待从你这里得到什么？

[原文] [Naval Ravikant]: expect nothing

[译文] [Naval Ravikant]: 别抱任何期待（Expect nothing）。

[原文] [Chris Williamson]: That's the most naval way that we could have finished this dude It's uh it's been a long time coming and I really do appreciate you for being here today But I do hope you deliver something Oh I think you have So thank you

[译文] [Chris Williamson]: 那是我们结束这段对话最“Naval”的方式了，伙计。呃，这期待已久，我真的很感激你今天能来。但我确实希望你能交付点什么。噢，我想你已经交付了。所以谢谢你。