为一切归咎于自己,并保持你的能动性
为一切归咎于自己,并保持你的能动性
Nivi: 让我们再谈谈另一条推文,我第一次看到它时就喜欢,或者我可能转发了它。我认为当人们看到一些他们还没想好如何表达、但心里知道、只是隐含——尚未明确表达出来的东西时,他们就会转发。
我想这就是人们觉得”我需要转发这个”的时候。
所以这条推文是1月17日发的:“为一切归咎于自己,并保持你的能动性。”
从我的角度来看就是:为一切承担责任,在为某件事承担责任的过程中,你创造并保持了去解决那个问题的能动性。如果你对问题不负责任,你就没有办法解决问题。
Naval: 先回应你关于这是你已经知道但以你喜欢的方式表达出来的观点。爱默生就经常这样做。他会用优美的方式表达事物,然后你会说:“哦,这正是我一直在想和感受的,但我不知道如何表达。”
他对此的说法是:“在每一部天才作品中,我们都能认出自己曾经拒绝过的想法;它们带着某种疏离的威严回到我们身边。“我太喜欢这句话了。这就是我试图在推特上做的事情,也就是我试图说一些真实的事情,但以有趣的方式。
这不仅是一种真实而有趣的表达方式,而且它还必须真正具有情感分量。它必须是最近打动我并对我重要的东西。否则,我只是在假装。我不会坐着去想该写什么推文。更多的是我遇到了某些事情,某些事情在情感上影响了我,然后我以某种方式综合表达出来。
我会测试它。我会想:“这是真的吗?“如果我觉得它是真实的,或者大部分是真实的,或者在我关心的背景下是真实的,并且如果我能以某种方式说出来帮助我记住它,那么我就把它发出去。对于理解它的人来说,这并不新鲜。
如果它不是以有趣的方式说出来,那么它就是陈词滥调,或者如果他们听得太多,它就是陈词滥调。但如果以有趣的方式说出来,那么它可能会提醒他们一些重要的事情,或者可能转化他们的具体知识,或者可能成为在他们自己头脑中将具体知识转化为更普遍知识的钩子。
所以我觉得这个过程对我自己有用,希望对其他人也有用。现在,对于这条具体的推文,我只是注意到人们非常愤世嫉俗的趋势,他们会说”所有的财富都是被偷走的”,例如,被银行家之类的人,或者裙带资本家,或者直接的小偷或寡头偷走的。
- “如果你是X,你在这个世界上就无法崛起。”
- “如果你是穷孩子,你在这个世界上就无法崛起。”
- “如果你来自这个种族或民族,如果你出生在那个国家,或者如果你跛脚、残疾或失明”,等等。
这样做的问题在于,是的,世界上确实存在真正的障碍。这不是一个公平的竞争环境,公平只存在于儿童的想象中,无法以任何真实的方式确定下来。但世界并不完全是运气。事实上,你知道这一点,因为在你自己的人生中,你做过一些事情导致了好的结果,你知道如果你没有做那件事,就不会导致那个好结果。
所以你绝对可以改变局面,这不全是运气。特别是你谈论的时间跨度越长,活动强度越大,你进行的迭代越多,你投入的思考和选择越多,运气就越不重要。它会退到远处。
给你一个简单的例子,大多数人不会喜欢这个例子,因为他们不在硅谷,但20年前我在硅谷遇到的每一个聪明人,每一个,那些年轻的聪明人,每一个都成功了。每一个。我想不出一个例外。我应该回去根据他们的聪明程度给他们所有人建立索引。顺便说一句,这就是Y Combinator大规模做的事情,对吧?多好的机制啊。
所以它是有效的。如果人们坚持20年,它是有效的。现在你可能会说:“你说得容易,老兄,那是给硅谷的人准备的。”
没有人是出生在这里的。他们都是搬到这里来的。他们搬到这里是因为他们想和其他聪明的孩子在一起,因为他们想拥有高能动性。所以能动性是有效的,但如果你在计算时间,你会失望的。
你会过早放弃。所以你需要更高的动力。这就是为什么埃隆要去火星,这就是为什么萨姆想要发明AGI。这就是为什么史蒂夫·乔布斯想在50年前,在80年代,就谈论制造一台能装进一本书的电脑。
他当时谈论的就是iPad。所以正是这些非常长远的愿景支撑着你在很长一段时间内真正构建你想要构建的东西,达到你想要达到的目标。
所以愤世嫉俗的信念是自我实现的。悲观的信念就像你在骑摩托车,但你在看着你应该避开的砖墙。你会不知不觉地转向砖墙。
所以你必须保持你的能动性。你必须保持你能改变事情的信念。你生来就有能动性。孩子们具有高能动性。他们去得到他们想要的东西。如果他们想要某样东西,他们看到了,他们就去拿。你必须保持你的能动性。你必须保持你能改变事情的信念。
Blame Yourself for Everything, and Preserve Your Agency
Nivi: Let’s talk about one more tweet which I liked when I first saw it, or I might have retweeted it. I think people retweet things when they see something that they haven’t figured out how to say yet, but they knew in their head, but it’s just implicit—it hadn’t been made explicit.
I think that’s when people are like, “I need to retweet this.”
So this one was January 17: “Blame yourself for everything, and preserve your agency.”
From my end it’s like: Take responsibility for everything, and in the process of taking responsibility for something, you create and preserve the agency to go solve that problem. If you’re not responsible for the problem, there’s no way for you to fix the problem.
Naval: Just to address your point of how it was something you already knew, but phrased in a way that you liked. Emerson did this all the time. He would phrase things in a beautiful way and you would say, “Oh, that’s exactly what I was thinking and feeling, but I didn’t know how to articulate it.”
And the way he put it was he said, “In every work of genius, we recognize our own rejected thoughts; they come back to us with a certain alienated majesty.” And I just love that line. It’s what I try to do with Twitter, which is I try to say something true, but in an interesting way.
And not only is this a true and interesting way to say it, but also it has to be something that really has emotional heft behind it. It has to have struck me recently and been important to me. Otherwise, I’m just faking it. I don’t sit around trying to think up tweets to write. It’s more that something happens to me, something affects me emotionally, and then I synthesize it in a certain way.
I test it. I’m like, “Is this true?” And if I feel like it’s true, or mostly true or true in the context that I care about, and if I can say it in some way that’ll help me stick in my mind, then I just send it out there. And it’s nothing new for the people who get it.
If it’s not said in an interesting way, then it’s a cliché, or if they’ve heard it too much, it’s a cliché. But if it’s said in an interesting way, then it may remind them of something that was important, or it might convert their specific knowledge, or might be a hook for converting their specific knowledge into more general knowledge in their own minds.
So I find that process useful for myself and hopefully others do too. Now, for the specific tweet, I just noticed this tendency where people are very cynical and they’ll say, “All the wealth is stolen,” for example, by banksters and the like, or crony capitalists or what have you, or just outright thieves or oligarchs.
- “You can’t rise up in this world if you’re X.”
- “You can’t rise up in this world if you’re a poor kid.”
- “You can’t rise up in this world if you are from this race or ethnicity, if you were born in that country, or if you are lame or crippled or blind,” or what have you.
The problem with this is that yes, there are real hindrances in the world. It is not a level playing field, and fair is something that only exists in a child’s imagination and cannot be pinned down in any real way. But the world is not entirely luck. In fact, you know that because in your own life there are things that you have done that have led to good outcomes and you know that if you had not done that thing, it would not have led to that good outcome.
So you can absolutely move the needle, and it’s not all luck. And especially the longer the timeframe you’re talking about, the more intense the activity, the more iteration you take and the more thinking and choice you apply into it, the less luck matters. It recedes into the distance.
To give you a simple example, which most people won’t love because they’re not in Silicon Valley, but every brilliant person I met in Silicon Valley 20 years ago, every single one, the young brilliant ones, every single one is successful. Every single one. I cannot think of an exception. I should have gone back and just indexed them all based on their brilliance. By the way, that’s what Y Combinator does at scale, right? What a great mechanism.
So it works. If people stick at it for 20 years, it works. Now you might say, “Easy for you to say, man, that’s for the people in Silicon Valley.”
No one was born here. They all moved here. They moved here because they wanted to be where the other smart kids were and because they wanted to be high agency. So agency does work, but if you’re keeping track of the time period, you’re going to be disappointed.
You’ll give up too soon. So you need a higher motivator. That’s why Elon goes to Mars, and that’s why Sam wants to invent AGI. And that’s why Steve Jobs wanted to build, 50 years ago, in the eighties he was talking about building a computer that would fit in a book.
He was talking about the iPad. So it’s these very long visions that sustain you over the long periods of time to actually build the thing you want to build and get to where you want to get.
So a cynical belief is self-fulfilling. A pessimistic belief is like you’re driving the motorcycle, but you’re looking at the brick wall that you’re supposed to turn away from. You will turn into the brick wall without even realizing it.
So you have to preserve your agency. You have to preserve your belief that you can change things. You’re born with agency. Children are high-agency. They go get what they want. If they want something, they see it, they go get it. You have to preserve your agency. You have to preserve your belief that you can change things.