视频库 / NO.076
--:--
点击播放，这里会跟随视频显示当前句的中英字幕。
Outliers: Why Some People Succeed and Some Don't
节目发布 2016-09-06 · Microsoft Research
EDITED TRANSCRIPT · 依据现场录音编译整理，可划线生成便签
编者按：本文整理自微软研究院讲座系列的一场现场活动。主讲人是《纽约客》专职撰稿人、加拿大裔作家马尔科姆·格拉德威尔，他此行为 2008 年出版的新书《异类》（Outliers）而来，讲完这一场便要赶去盖茨基金会继续演讲。全文依据现场录音编译整理，除删去口头语、寒暄与重复之外，讲述与问答的全部论证、例证和转折均予保留。文中「兑现率」对应英文 capitalization rate，是理解这场谈话的关键词。
开场
主持人： 微软研究院每年邀请数百位有影响力的讲者来到这里，其中有一流的科学家、技术领域的知名专家、畅销书作者和顶尖学者，我们把这些讲座录制下来，免费向公众开放。今天到场的是格拉德威尔先生，他要谈的是新书《异类》。这是一本关于成功的书，起点是一个非常朴素的问题：那些用自己的一生做成了某件了不起的事的人，与其他所有人之间，究竟差在哪里？这本书通过考察我们身边那些非凡之人的人生来回答这个问题，包括才华横溢的、出类拔萃的、与众不同的。读完这本书你会发现，我们过去思考成功的方式，全都错了。马尔科姆·格拉德威尔是《纽约客》的专职撰稿人，著有两本畅销书《引爆点》和《决断两秒间》。请和我一起欢迎他来到微软。
格拉德威尔： 非常高兴来到这里。我不在办公室上班，我在家写东西，所以早就忘了办公室是什么样子。刚才我在拐角处看见一台敞开着的大冰箱，里面塞满了各种饮料，我当时就想，这也太爽了。
今天我要讲的是新书。书里的话题很多，我可以讲的东西也很多，但我想讲一个其实并不在书里的想法。这是我写完书之后一直在琢磨的东西，而它恰恰把整本书要说的话都概括进去了。
兑现率这把尺子
格拉德威尔： 这个概念叫「兑现」（capitalization），是一位非常了不起的心理学家詹姆斯·弗林（James Flynn）反复写过的东西。对智商研究稍有了解的人一定听说过「弗林效应」，那就是他的发现。他写过很多关于兑现率的文章，问的是这样一个问题：一个社会把自身潜力兑现出来的比率是多少？换句话说，在所有有能力做成某件事的人当中，最终真的做成了那件事的人，占多大比例？我们把一群人身上的才能利用得有多高效？
我举个例子。不知道你们有多少人读过迈克尔·刘易斯（Michael Lewis）的《弱点》（The Blind Side），那是一本极其精彩的书，写的是东孟菲斯一个身高一米九八、体重三百五十磅的少年，被一个富裕的白人家庭发现并收养。他们意识到这孩子是个非同寻常的运动员，于是一路陪着他，把他培养成全国最出色的进攻锋线球员之一。多年之后他即将被选入国家橄榄球联盟，赚得盆满钵满。整个故事都很不可思议，但真正让我念念不忘的是结尾处的一段话。这个叫迈克尔·奥赫的孩子来自孟菲斯东区的贫民窟，他说，如果我从小一起长大的那些人里面，所有喜欢橄榄球、并且真有橄榄球天赋的人，最后都真的去打了橄榄球，那这个国家得有两个国家橄榄球联盟才装得下。
他的意思是，东孟菲斯在把当地的运动天赋兑现出来这件事上，干得非常糟糕。刘易斯顺着这句话追查下去，他找了东孟菲斯学区的一些人，问他们：在拿到大学体育奖学金的孩子里，最后真正走进大学校门的有多少？答案是六分之一。这个数字把我彻底震住了。因为如果说美国有哪一件事是我们真正擅长的，我本来以为，那一定是把年轻人尤其是非裔年轻人的运动能力开发出来。我原以为在一个内城区，体育项目的兑现率应该有百分之九十。可东孟菲斯告诉我们，那个数字是六分之一，百分之十六。
想一想吧。在体育这样一件我们如此看重的事情上，在美国社会没有什么比职业体育的效益最大化更值得我们投入时间、注意力和智力资源的领域里，我们的兑现率是百分之十六。那么在那些我们并不怎么在乎的事情上，兑现率又能高到哪里去？这是个让人清醒的念头。它说明，我们这个社会离把成员的人的潜能真正用足，还有极其漫长的路要走。
想明白这一点之后我才意识到，《异类》其实说的就是这个问题：找出那些压低兑现率的约束条件，再想办法把它们拆掉。所以今天我打算讲几种这样的约束，看看在人类活动的各个领域里，究竟是什么东西在压低兑现率。
约束一：贫穷
格拉德威尔： 第一种约束是显而易见的，那就是贫穷。当东孟菲斯长大的迈克尔·奥赫说，他从小认识的那些有运动天赋的孩子里，只有极小一部分最终走进了大学，他说的其实就是贫穷。东孟菲斯是全美最贫穷的社区之一。我们知道，那种程度的贫穷会让一个有能力做成某事的人极难真正把那件事做成。
这是对兑现率的一种明显约束。但我认为，贫穷有一个特点是，即便我们承认它在限制兑现方面很重要，我们仍然低估了它有多强大。举个例子。我在书里谈到了加利福尼亚著名的特曼研究。这项研究始于上世纪二十年代，主持者是斯坦福的心理学家特曼。顺便说一句，斯坦福第一任工学院院长也姓特曼，斯坦福不是有个特曼楼吗？在座有谁上过斯坦福？那位是这位特曼的儿子。算是送给斯坦福校友的一个小知识。
特曼做了这样一件事：他给二十五万名加州学童做了智商测验，从中挑出最顶尖的千分之一，也就是智商一百四十以上、基本可以算是天才级别的孩子。然后他跟踪这些孩子的一生，跟了五十年，想看看他们后来都怎么样了。他起初的想法是，既然他如此笃信智商是人生成就的唯一决定因素，那么他挑出来的这一群人，注定会成为学术界和产业界的领袖，会成为管理各种机构的人，会成为顶尖的政治家和顶尖的知识分子。
他跟着这批人走了二三十年，二三十年之后他发现，事情完全不是那么回事。这些孩子长大成人之后，命运惊人地参差不齐。有一小群人确实混得非常好，最顶上的百分之十五真的占据了社会上举足轻重的位置。中间有一大群人过着相当平庸的日子，请记住，这些可都是天才级智商的成年人，而他们大多数只是有一份中等偏上的职业生涯而已。再往下还有一大块人，无论用什么标准衡量都算是失败者，他们的人生按任何一种职业尺度去量都令人极其失望，他们身上那份非凡的潜能似乎完全没有派上用场。
特曼必须面对的问题是：底下那群人为什么失败了？做得漂亮的那一群和垫底的那一群，差别到底在哪里？这个问题显然让他着了魔。他把所有能想到的解释挨个试了一遍。是性格吗？不是。是习惯吗？不是。他一条一条往下排。最后他发现，答案简单得让人心惊：那些混得最好的天才儿童，都出自富裕家庭；而那些人生彻底失败的天才儿童，都生在穷人家。他们的父母没上过大学，家里没有书，没有那种支撑求知习惯和智力活动的文化环境与制度托底。
换句话说，他的结论是，哪怕你给一个孩子配上一颗十亿里挑一的大脑，那也不足以保证这个孩子的成功。贫穷对兑现的约束强大到什么地步？强大到足以把一个天才儿童压成一辈子的不如平庸，压成一生深切的失望。
这就是第一种约束。我说过，它是最显而易见的那一种，但我觉得很重要的是让我们所有人都意识到，贫穷这个约束大概比我们想象的还要大。尤其是我们这些跟贫穷没有切身接触的人，很可能会低估它对一个人能不能做出成绩所造成的巨大影响。
约束二：出生月份
格拉德威尔： 我们再来说几种没那么显眼的约束。写这本书的时候我对精英运动队的人员构成产生了浓厚的兴趣，一旦你去看，就会发现各种稀奇古怪的现象。
有一次我翻了 2007 年捷克青年冰球队的名单。我挑这支队伍没有任何特别理由，纯属随机，只是因为它是一支精英队伍。它当时是世界第二或第三好的青年冰球队，当然，排在加拿大之后，我是加拿大人。这是一支真正的精英队伍，这些孩子后来是要去打国家冰球联盟，或者去欧洲的顶级成人联赛的。
我给你们念一遍 2007 年捷克国家青年队队员的出生日期：1 月 3 日、1 月 3 日、1 月 12 日、2 月 8 日、2 月 10 日、2 月 17 日、2 月 20 日、2 月 24 日、3 月 5 日、3 月 10 日、3 月 26 日、4 月 22 日、5 月 5 日、6 月 6 日、7 月 2 日、7 月 19 日、7 月 20 日、8 月 15 日、8 月 25 日、8 月 31 日、11 月 29 日、12 月 31 日。
这份名单奇怪在哪里？你们注意到了吗？二十个人里有十一个生在一月、二月和三月。出生日期的分布严重偏向一年中的头三个月。而这绝不是 2007 年捷克青年冰球队独有的怪癖。事实上，你去看世界上任何一支精英冰球队，或者任何一支精英足球队，都会看到同样的倾斜分布，队员中生于一二三月的人多得离谱。
为什么？答案是，全世界年龄分组的冰球和足球，参赛资格的截止日期都是 1 月 1 日。而在这两个项目里，我们都极其积极地从很小的年纪就开始挑选最优秀、最出色的孩子。我们去看一群十岁的孩子打冰球或者踢足球，把最好的挑出来，编进全明星队，给他们特别的教练、额外的训练时间、更多的比赛，一路鼓励再鼓励。我们以为这是把这个项目的人才库兑现出来的最好办法。
可是想一想，十岁的孩子里，谁在一项体力活动上会表现得最好？当然是年纪最大的那些。一月出生的孩子比十月出生的孩子多了十个月的成熟度，而在十岁这个年纪，十个月是极其漫长的一段时间，可能意味着七八厘米的身高差，可能意味着一个笨手笨脚，另一个协调得惊人。所以我们自以为在挑最好的，其实我们挑的是最年长的。然后我们把这些最年长的孩子挑出来，给他们特别的指导、各种额外机会、大量额外比赛，十年之后，你瞧，他们真的成了最好的。这是一个自我实现的预言。是我们亲手创造了让他们变得最好的条件，却愚蠢地以为自己识别出了真正的天赋。
你只要看清这一点，就会明白这对兑现构成了多么惊人的约束。按常理，冰球才能或者足球才能在一年之内的分布应该是均匀的，十二月出生的伟大球员理应和一月出生的一样多。可我们看到这些队伍严重偏向头三个月，这说明冰球的兑现率一定不到百分之五十。下半年出生的那些天赋，我们全都白白扔在了桌上。
这个问题显然有一个非常简单的解法：在组织年龄分组的足球、冰球以及任何其他项目的联赛时，我们应该按出生月份分成不同的赛道。设三条平行的联赛，一条给上四个月出生的孩子，一条给中间四个月出生的，一条给后四个月出生的，让他们各自独立发展到十五六岁，然后再从中选拔。这么简单的一件事，如果我们真去做了，这个领域的人才兑现率能翻一倍甚至两倍。
那我们为什么不做？因为我们拒绝承认，是我们自己定下的、任意的规则在限制兑现。我们死死抱住一个天真的信念不放，认为我们在这个领域搭起来的这套精英选拔机制完全理性、完全高效、完全公平。
所以这是第二种约束，我把它叫作「愚蠢约束」。它指的是我们没有能力理解，我们据以建立精英选拔制度的那些规则，本身就带着深刻的任意性和不公平。
如果有人觉得这是件小事，觉得那些孩子打不了冰球又怎样，去玩别的项目不就行了，那我要提醒你，这个现象在很多项目里都存在。我念一遍 2007 年捷克青年足球队的出生日期，准备好了吗：1 月 1 日、1 月 3 日、1 月 5 日、1 月 12 日、1 月 26 日、1 月 27 日、2 月 1 日、2 月 14 日、2 月 20 日、2 月 21 日、2 月 24 日、3 月 15 日、3 月 26 日、3 月 29 日、4 月 16 日、5 月 20 日、5 月 26 日、6 月 22 日、6 月 24 日、8 月 18 日、9 月 26 日。
如果这还不算一种压在足球才能上的愚蠢约束，而且是发生在一个可能比任何国家都更把足球当回事的国家里，那我不知道什么才算。换句话说，我们必须非常严肃地对待一个问题：我们究竟该怎样设计所谓的精英选拔制度。
同一套逻辑还可以直接套用到教育机会上。如果你单看孩子的出生日期，看他们落在班级里最年幼、最年长还是中间的那一档，再看他们在学校里的表现，你会看到一模一样的模式。最近有一项很漂亮的研究，跟踪了西方成千上万名孩子，一路追到大学阶段，结果发现：在同年龄组里相对最年幼的那批孩子，上大学的可能性比相对最年长的那批低百分之十一。百分之十一是一个巨大的差距。这意味着有百分之十一的孩子，他们的机会被彻底堵死，他们的人的潜能被白白浪费。为什么？因为我们蠢到在组织小学教育时，完全无视生理成熟度这个再明显不过的事实。这又是一个刺眼的例证，说明愚蠢约束能把人的潜能的兑现压低到什么程度。
约束三：态度
格拉德威尔： 第三种约束。关于约束我可以一直讲下去，但我讲到第三种就停。这一种在很多方面是最有意思、也最有争议的一种，不过我觉得值得挖一挖。我把它叫作兑现的态度约束。
我书里有一整章讨论这样一个问题：为什么亚洲孩子的数学比西方同龄人好那么多？
这方面的数字无可辩驳，而且差距惊人。新加坡、香港、韩国、日本的孩子，和美国、德国、英国等地的孩子，在数学表现上的差距，我记得几周前刚出了一轮国际数学测验的比较结果，那个差距不是这么一点点，是这么一大截。
而当你仔细去找原因，会发现这个差距似乎与态度有关，与两种文化中的孩子面对一道数学题时抱着什么样的态度有关。情况似乎是这样：亚洲孩子坐下来面对一道中学数学题时，他们对「解开这道题意味着什么」有一套不同的预期，他们预期只要肯在这道题上下功夫，题就是解得开的。而当我们仔细考察西方孩子的态度，他们似乎认为，自己能不能解开这道题，取决于自己的能力，取决于某种与生俱来、要么有要么没有的天分。
这种态度上的差异对孩子的数学表现产生了深远影响，因为事实证明，亚洲人对待数学的这套办法是对的。我说「对的」是什么意思？举个例子。我们给全世界孩子做的国际数学测验叫 TIMSS，每四年考一次，全世界的孩子考同一份卷子，各国排名就是这么来的。在考数学卷的同时，我们还让他们填一份问卷。这份问卷非常长，一百二十道题，问的都是些对研究者有用的东西：你每天学习几个小时，你父母鼓不鼓励你，你喜不喜欢数学，诸如此类。它实在太长了，长到大多数孩子根本填不完。
几年前，宾夕法尼亚大学一位非常了不起的学者厄林·博伊（Erling Boe）决定，按照各国孩子填完了问卷中百分之多少的题目，给世界各国排一个名次。你猜他把这个排名和各国孩子数学题答对率的排名放在一起对照，结果如何？两份排名完全一致。我说的完全一致，是指两者的相关度之高，在社会科学史上闻所未闻，那简直就是同一样东西。
换句话说，如果你想知道一个国家的数学水平如何，你根本不必问那个国家的孩子任何一道数学题，你只需要让他们做一件事：安安静静坐在座位上，长时间专注于一项任务。如果他们做得到，他们的数学就好。这实在太有意思了。
也就是说，当我们看东亚文化，我们看到的这种数学能力的差异，并不是数学天赋或数学资质上的某种底层差异，而是兑现率的差异。东亚文化对待「用功」这件事的态度，作为一种把数学才能兑现出来的机制，效率远远高于西方对待用功的态度。
这也告诉我们，西方数学教育的亏空到底在哪里。不在课程，不在教师质量，不在班级规模，不在我们往学校里砸了多少钱，而在于那个十一年级的孩子坐下来做代数或者微积分时，脑子里装着的态度。顺便说一句，问题也不在我们的基因里，尽管有些人很想那么说。有一整套稀奇古怪的论调，说西方人在数学方面的基因不如东方人，那是一个荒唐而且完全多余的推论。不，这是文化的事，是态度的差异，是他们把孩子的能力兑现得高效得多。
那为什么会这样？我插一句题外话。有一个非常有意思的问题：如果东亚文化在数学上对待努力的态度确实根本不同，那这种态度是从哪儿来的？没有人知道答案。但我在书里冒昧提出了一个我认为说得通的解释：我认为这和历史上农业耕作方式所积淀下来的用力模式有关。
你去看，香港、华南、韩国和日本这几个地方有什么共同点？它们在历史上都是种稻米的文化。而种稻米的特别之处在于，它是人类已知的最耗劳力、认知上也最复杂的农业形态。
我父亲那边的欧洲祖先，中世纪时在英格兰北部当农民，一年的劳作时间大概是一千小时。这意味着他们一周干五天，每天从天亮干到中午；周末喝得酩酊大醉；到了冬天基本上就是睡觉。而且不知道你们知不知道，中世纪英格兰的农民有非常非常多的假日。同一时期，华南或者日本的农民，一年绝不是一千小时，而是三千小时。原因很简单：种稻子和种小麦不是程度之别，是种类之别，是一套完全不同的干活方式。它要求你天亮就起，一直干到天黑；它要求你周末照干不误。我在书里引了一句很妙的中国谚语：一年三百六十日，天不亮就下地、天黑才回家的人，是不会挨饿的。这句话把东西方农业方式的区别一语道尽。我那些英格兰北部的农民祖先绝不可能造出这样一句谚语，他们的说法大概会是：一年干一百七十五天、从天亮干到十一点的人，也许会饿，也许不会。
我的论点是，如果你的文化就是这么干活的，如果你们这么干了一千年，那么这种态度就会深深长进你的构成里。等到你的孩子，即便他们自己从没下过稻田，坐下来面对一道微积分或者代数题时，那份遗产、那种对待努力和坚持的态度，会漂亮地迁移到这项最现代的任务上来。这也就意味着，你的文化在兑现自身能力这件事上，会做得好得多。
这就是全部真相吗？我不知道，多半不是，肯定还有各种各样别的解释，书里我也谈了一些。但我认为重要的是，当我们换一个角度看问题，试着以历史和文化为线索去找答案，也就是说，当你从兑现率的角度去思考问题，你会在和以往完全不同的地方去找答案，而不是采用那种简单得多、也化约得多的路数。
长跑与天赋论
格拉德威尔： 为什么这场关于兑现的讨论如此重要？因为我认为，当我们去看为什么某些人或某些群体在这个世界上取得了成功，我们的默认解释永远是：这些成就上的差别反映了能力上的底层差别。我们忘了贫穷、愚蠢和态度这三样东西，才是对兑现率重要得多的约束。
我恰好是个跑步的人。和大多数跑者一样，过去二三十年里我一直在看着肯尼亚人和埃塞俄比亚人在长跑项目上取得压倒性的统治地位。这促使各种各样的人得出结论说，这背后一定存在能力上的根本差异，东非人的基因构成里一定有什么特别之处，让他们比我们其他人更能跑。这是一种天赋解释。
但有一种解释比它更优雅、更有说服力、也更简单：他们的兑现率比我们高。美国伟大的马拉松选手阿尔贝托·萨拉查（Alberto Salazar）不久前指出，在肯尼亚，大约有一百万名十到十七岁的男生每天跑十到十二英里。一百万个男孩，每天跑十到十二英里。而在美国，这个数字大概是五千，能有五千就不错了。
那我们长跑的兑现率是多少？肯定不到百分之一，大概是千分之五。在美国，有多少有能力成为伟大长跑运动员的孩子，这辈子有机会发现自己具备这份能力？他们永远不会发现，因为他们从来没有真正付出发现它所必需的那些劳动。而在肯尼亚，他们漏掉了多少伟大的长跑选手？如果有一百万个男孩每天跑十英里，那几乎一个也漏不掉，他们的兑现率大概有百分之九十五。差别就在这里。差别在于一种文化看重什么，把时间和注意力花在哪里，以及它在发现、培养和利用这类人的潜能上做得有多好。在长跑这件事上他们做得极好，我们做得极差。
我认为这样去想问题，能极其有力地厘清我们该怎样改善对人的潜能的利用。它意味着你不放弃，意味着你不会看着一个不成功的群体，就断言他们没有成功的能力，断言他们面对的问题太根深蒂固、太顽固，我们无能为力。兑现率这套讲法给了我们能力，给了我们底气，它告诉我们：只要我们愿意去关注贫穷、愚蠢和态度所施加的那些约束，我们完全可以在人们最终能走多远这件事上，造成实实在在的巨大差别。
这就是我在这本书里所琢磨的东西的一点点影子。里面的东西还多得多，不过我很乐意回答大家的问题。
一万小时与年龄
提问者： 我很不满你没提披头士那个例子，我特别喜欢那个例子，四千小时。我不知道你有没有讲到，四五十岁以上的人已经没有一万小时可以投进去了。对我们这些人，你有什么建议，我们还怎么成为异类？
格拉德威尔： 这个问题指的是我在书里的一段讨论：一个人要精通某件事需要多久。许多心理学家都观察到，要掌握一项认知上复杂的任务，无论是下顶尖水平的国际象棋、当脑外科医生、写古典音乐，还是当一个出色的程序员，似乎无一例外都需要一万小时的刻意练习。一万小时大致相当于每天四小时、连续十年。也就是说，哪怕是天分最高的人，也得先投进这么多时间，才可能达到顶尖水准。
但我不认为这个观察是在把年长者的门关上，恰恰相反，我觉得它说的是反面的意思。它说的是，在人生的任何一个时点，只要我们有条件用一种正式的、严格的、密集的方式去投入一个问题，我们就应该能看到成果。换句话说，那些做出极不寻常的、极富创造性的事情的人，特别之处并不在于他们的头脑里有什么与生俱来的东西，有什么特别的天才，也不在于青春本身有什么魔力。恰恰相反，它说明，我们看到的只是把自己严格投入一项任务之后必然的、可以预期的结果，而这件事，任何人在人生的任何阶段，只要愿意那样投入，都可以做到。所以我认为这是一个让人松一口气的观察。
截止日期无解
提问者： 少年棒球联盟的截止日期是 5 月 1 日。对于一个想打棒球、却生在 4 月 27 日的男孩，最好的补救策略是什么？
格拉德威尔： 少年棒球联盟的截止日期在仲夏或者初夏。事实上，如果你去看美国职业棒球运动员的出生日期分布，会发现他们高度集中在夏末那几个月，多数棒球运动员出生在六七八月，或者七八九月，具体是哪一段我记不清了。总之，同样的效应在棒球里表现得非常清楚。
那个 4 月 27 日出生的孩子该怎么办？从某种意义上说，无计可施。这正是我写这本书时想要反对的一种美国式思维：认为一切障碍归根到底都可以由个人克服，只要那个人足够坚定。我认为坚持和决心确实是成功中极其重要的组成部分，但我们也必须明白，面对愚蠢约束时，个人几乎什么也做不了。这正是我把它们叫作愚蠢约束的原因：它们是在集体层面上被愚蠢地强加下来的，强大到足以压倒最坚定的个人。有些事情只能在社会层面上解决。而正是我们对精英选拔制度的高效与公平所抱的那份天真信念，妨碍了我们看清这一点。
对那个想打棒球的 4 月 27 日出生的孩子，你唯一能做的，就是我前面说的那件事：按生理成熟度设立平行联赛。这才是解法。你看我念的那两份捷克队名单就知道，捷克有非常非常多的孩子想成为出色的足球或冰球运动员，可他们偏偏生在下半年，证据摆在那里：他们没有得到机会，他们没能出头。光是要求个人再努力一点，是不够的。
劣势即优势
提问者： 我读这本书的时候在想，既然它讲的是那些多少带点任意性的约束，那你在研究中有没有遇到反例，也就是有人在这些约束之下依然成功了？
格拉德威尔： 这个问题非常有意思，也是我写完书之后想了很多的东西。这本书关注的是「优势之为优势」，也就是那些让你比原本更领先一步的机会和优势。但那显然只是四种情形之一。
还有一种是「优势之为劣势」。如果你父亲身家十亿美元，你觉得自己作为孩子，今天的处境是比父亲年收入十万美元更好，还是更糟？我宁愿要一个年入十万的爸爸，也不要一个身家十亿的爸爸。我认为有一个坐拥十亿的父亲，对一个人的动力其实相当有摧毁性。这就是一种其实是劣势的优势。
第三种是「劣势之为劣势」。比如在东孟菲斯，做一个吸毒的单亲母亲的孩子，那是彻头彻尾的劣势，几乎没有人能翻过这座山。
而你问的是第四种：有没有其实是优势的劣势？这一种最迷人。
举个例子。近年来最耐人寻味的发现之一是，有研究指出，百分之三十的美国创业者在人生的某个阶段被诊断出有严重的学习障碍。你只要看看这个名单就知道了：布兰森是阅读障碍者，查尔斯·施瓦布是阅读障碍者，创办金考（Kinko's）的那位也是阅读障碍者，我还能一直往下数，名单有这么长。
为什么？有一种说法是，这绝非巧合，他们的创业才能恰恰是他们的障碍所导致的直接结果。如果你从小学最初的阶段起就读不了也写不了，你怎么活下去？你只能补偿。当然，很多孩子补偿不了，就此掉队，但那些挺过来的人是靠补偿挺过来的。他们怎么补偿？
首先，你从极小的年纪就学会了委派。那些读不了写不了、却还是念完了学校的孩子，你知道他们是怎么做到的吗？他们让别人替自己读、替自己写。其次，你学会成为一个极好的口头沟通者，你不能写不能读，那你就得能说。再次，你学会解决问题，因为你的人生本身就是一个大问题：你身处一个机构，它要求你做两件事，而这两件事你一件也做不了。最后，你学会当领导者。你不得不把这四样都练出来：解决问题、委派、口头表达、领导。事实上还有一项很漂亮的研究指出，在有阅读障碍的创业者中，百分之八十在中学时代当过校队队长，而没有阅读障碍的创业者中这个比例是百分之三十。这就是那个性格类型。
那么等你进入真实世界，一个创业者被要求具备什么？善于领导，善于委派，善于解决问题，善于口头沟通。而这些人一辈子都在练的，恰恰就是构成创业成功的这四项基石。如果你去问这些人，比如约翰·钱伯斯，他有阅读障碍，读自己的邮件都费劲，你问他们阅读障碍在他们的成功里扮演了什么角色，他们会说：那不是我必须克服的障碍，那恰恰是我成功的原因。这是一种最终变成了优势的劣势。
在我看来，这一类才是最迷人的。我再举一个例子。教育研究中最惊人的发现之一是，缩小班级规模几乎找不到任何收益，尽管所有家长都对班级规模着魔，而且是非理性地着魔。你的孩子在一个二十五人的班里，你听说另一所学校一个班只有十九个人，于是你一年掏两万五千美元把孩子送去那所十九人的学校。可事实上，成堆成堆的学术研究都没能证明小班有任何优势，除了对最低年级里处境极其不利的孩子之外。对其他所有人来说，完全是白搭。
为什么会白搭？因为这讲不通啊。在一个老师顾不上你的班里，你凭什么表现得一样好？教师投入和学生表现之间难道不该有相关性吗？是该有，但前提是这世上不存在「其实是优势的劣势」。如果待在一个大班里这个劣势，是某种你会去补偿的东西呢？如果它就像阅读障碍呢？如果你是三十个孩子中的一个，你会补偿，你会学会自立，而这份自立到头来跟大量教师反馈所能给你的东西一样重要，那又如何？
我们对第四类好处坚决地不感兴趣，我们甚至没法谈论它。没有人愿意讨论：我们可以在学校体系里引入哪些经过设计的劣势，从而产生正面的效果？我们所有人都活在一个心理学上极其幼稚的观念之下，仿佛学校里唯一起作用的就是那些「优势之为优势」的东西，仿佛别的什么都不存在。
我很想看到一样东西，我现在开始碎碎念了。我住在曼哈顿。曼哈顿有那种超级超级超级高档的私立学校，全世界最占尽优势的私立学校，一年学费三万美元的高中。我不敢肯定那些学校不属于「其实是劣势的优势」这一类。我很想看到一份系统的分析，告诉我：为什么去那样一所学校，就比学会在一个成分复杂得多、也粗粝得多的公立学校环境里应付过来更好？我看不出这是显而易见的。何况事实上，把孩子送进那些学校的成功人士，多数自己上的正是那种粗粝、混杂的公立学校。所以这是一种巨大的认知失调：你转过身去否定那个明明造就了你的东西，不让自己的孩子碰它。以什么名义呢？就好比那个每天早上光着脚走七英里去上学的爷爷，如今下雨天开着越野车把孙子送到两个街区外的学校。爷爷，既然这招对你管用，为什么对我就不管用了？
局外人与中间人
提问者： 你把亚洲和西方作了比较，但即使在西方内部，你有没有考察过别的文化解释？比如我读过不少研究，试图解释为什么西欧和东欧的犹太人中出了那么多诺贝尔奖得主，究竟是基因的还是文化的。有没有办法把那种基因说法驳倒？
格拉德威尔： 有。很多所谓的犹太人优势，其实是被处在类似社会位置上的其他族群共享的。印度的帕西人，散布在世界各地的黎巴嫩人，东南亚、马来西亚和越南的华人，我还可以一直数下去。有一整串族群，如果你仔细去看他们扮演的角色和取得的成就，你会发现他们做的是同一件事。所以犹太人一点也不反常，他们完全不反常，他们属于一种共通的成就模式，这种模式属于大国内部那些界限分明的少数族群。
这里面有很大一部分与他们的处境有关。处在那个位置上会附带一连串劣势，但同时也附带一套优势。局外人身份，也就是作为这样一个少数族裔的外来群体，如果你想扮演任何一种中间人的角色，那是极其有用的。而那些群体做的正是这件事。黎巴嫩人、帕西人、华人、犹太人，无一例外最终都扮演了这种做生意的中间人角色，而这是只有局外人才能承担的角色。因为局外人被允许去做一些多数族群成员做不了的事：你可以强硬，你可以说不。
假如你要当银行家，当然，过去十年华尔街那些银行家不在此列，但从历史上看，如果你是个银行家，你的成败取决于你说不的能力，取决于你能不能板起脸对一个不还钱的人说：你必须还。如果你是主流文化的一员，这件事非常难做，因为你一旦顶撞别人、把脚跺下去，你就把自己的社会地位赌上了。可如果你属于一个游离在主流文化之外的少数群体，你就可以强硬，你就可以说不。所以你会看到，银行业在各地始终由那么几个群体把持。
我母亲在牙买加长大。说起来有意思，牙买加正是一个完美的例子：牙买加的工商阶层是华人、犹太人和黎巴嫩人，简直就是这套道理的精确注脚。我们可以顺着这个想法去玩味，从而理解这些群体身上各种各样的成就模式，因为这些群体在专业领域的成功率也高得不成比例，在某种程度上智识上的成功率同样高得不成比例。
时代与十万小时
格拉德威尔： 我觉得我有点冷落后排了。请说。
提问者： 还是关于一万小时。在你看来，在我们今天所处的这个时代取得成功，和在大萧条时期、或者说这次大衰退时期相比，难度如何？
格拉德威尔： 这问题很有意思。我觉得今天更容易，因为可供你去做好的事情实在太多了。在三十年代，成功的定义很窄，就是当医生或者当律师；而今天，我们会给予同等地位的行当大概有二十五种。或者说，在华尔街崩盘之后，是二十四种。抱歉，我实在忍不住要挖苦华尔街。所以从这个角度说，对那些愿意投入一万小时练习的人来说，可选的清单比过去长得多，这算是我们的优势。
提问者： 我的意思是，比如比尔·盖茨是怎么一步步做到的，凌晨三点到六点在华盛顿大学编程，在世人意识到这个东西会变成今天我们所有人从事的行业之前，他就看到了那种成功。
格拉德威尔： 我明白了。这类问题是没法回答的，因为它要求我们知道下一个是什么。盖茨那一代人的特点在于，他们是在世界其他人还没意识到某个领域重要之前，就把那一万小时投了进去。按定义，我们今天不知道那个领域是什么，只有今天十五岁的、相当于当年比尔·盖茨的那个孩子知道。所以家里有十五岁孩子的各位，回去问问他们吧。反正我是不会知道的。
荣誉文化的余波
提问者： 能不能再讲讲肯塔基州哈兰的荣誉文化？我觉得那部分特别有意思。
格拉德威尔： 在书里讲文化的那一部分，我其实是在为讨论亚洲人的数学做铺垫。因为我给出的那套文化解释里，最难理解的一点是：今天在韩国、新加坡或者日本数学学得好的孩子，自己不是稻农，他们的父母不是，有些人连祖父母都不是。那么种稻怎么可能解释他们今天的样子？
要接受这一点，你必须先接受另一个观念：文化的模型、规范和法则，在造就它们的那些环境早已消失之后，仍然会长久地留存下去。那些东西还飘在空气里，它们不会慢慢淡掉，也不会凭空消失，它们会一直待在那儿。
所以我在书里解释了为什么阿巴拉契亚地区一直是美国最暴力的地方。这个解释不在阿巴拉契亚生活的具体当下条件里，而在那里居民的祖先来自何方。阿巴拉契亚是由苏格兰-爱尔兰人开拓的，他们来自英国的边境地带。在那几百年间，在那种最无法无天、最危险、最贫瘠的生存环境里，他们发展出了一种叫作荣誉文化的东西：荣誉就是一切，为了捍卫荣誉你什么都做得出来。而那恰恰是一种会导致大量暴力的文化。
书里那一整个部分，都是为了让我们做好准备，去接受一个看似反直觉的观念：你的曾曾曾祖父母靠什么谋生，会影响你今天怎么看这个世界。这一点并不显然，我想对很多人来说都是个难以把握的点。
分母与选拔池
提问者： 你把一万小时的道理讲得很有说服力，也讲清了那些处于劣势的人。但我想问的是社会层面的损失。位置就那么多，比如捷克队，如果有一条更好的通道，让各个月份出生的人分布均匀，那支队伍会更强吗？
格拉德威尔： 我觉得按理说会。就拿加拿大来说吧，我是加拿大人。假设加拿大真的搞了三条平行联赛，那么他们挑选球员的那个分母就变了。从现在的分布看，你可以合理地估计他们的兑现率是百分之四十。如果我们能把兑现率提到百分之八十，我们就把可供最高水平选拔的孩子的池子扩大了一倍。国家冰球联盟里的位置数量并没有变，位置就那么多；但按理说，如果你捞鱼的那个池子大了一倍，人才的平均水准就应该更高，联盟里人才的中位水平应该被抬上去。
提问者： 那么请允许我追问。我知道我可能要挨批，但还是问吧。照这么说，捷克队里或者所有这类队伍里，那些出生在下半年的人，会不会其实比出生在上半年的人更强？
格拉德威尔： 这个问题问到了最有意思的地方。有几种可能。他们也许是克服了障碍的人；但也可能只是发育上的异常值。也就是说，你去看一群七岁的孩子，他们的成熟速度并不一致。大多数情况下确实是一月出生的孩子比十二月出生的更高更壮，但在十岁十一岁的年纪，有些十二月出生的孩子的成熟度已经赶上了一月出生的。我猜你看到的就是这些孩子，他们最终进了国家冰球联盟，只不过是因为他们的发育曲线略微超前。我认为大概是这样，不过我不确定，这是个很好的问题，值得去查一查。但我确实翻过历史上最伟大的冰球运动员名单，他们几乎全都生在一月、二月和三月。
兑现率的思想实验
提问者： 那这是不是也关系到把已有的东西利用起来的能力？就像你说的东非跑者，他们那里有一百万人，但他们的体制其实没有能力对这一百万人做点什么。在微软内部，围绕创新有一场很好的讨论，其中一个议题是：我们怎么去挖掘创新，因为创新并不总是从微软研究院出来的。可能公司别的部门里有人，做运营的、做技术支持的，有一个很好的点子，但如果没有把它捞出来并且推进下去的机制，那这就是压在我们身上的那种「愚蠢因素」，一边妨碍我们发现好点子，一边又在往上推着我们去共享它们。
格拉德威尔： 这一点说得好。让我们回到你前面那个问题，做个思想实验，还是拿冰球举例。假设我们想提高加拿大冰球的兑现率，一种办法就是我刚才说的：不增加国家冰球联盟的位置，而是增加培养联赛的数量，做出那种分流结构。另一种办法则是增加位置。作为一个思想实验，假设我们把国家冰球联盟的规模扩大一倍，那么这种顶端扩容，会不会倒逼下面的培养体系把冰球人才兑现得更高效？换句话说，这件事到底该自下而上做，还是自上而下做？
我对自上而下的那个版本很好奇，因为我们这个国家眼下就有一个现成的样本。像微软这样的公司，以及整整一层高科技企业，长期处在极度缺人的状态，永远在抱怨招不到足够多的人来填这些岗位，得去海外找，等等。可在这个案例里，这种长期的人才短缺并没有真正把我们在数学和科学上的兑现率大幅拉起来。事实上，如果我的数字没记错，过去二三十年里，美国在数学和科学上的相对表现如果说有什么变化的话，反而是退步了。
这似乎说明，自上而下的路子，也就是从供给侧还是需求侧，我老是把这两个词搞混，反正就是在顶端增加位置的那种做法，也许并不是最好的办法。不过我不确定，这些不同的方案都值得好好想一想。
提问者： 那你是不是认为，当企业投资社区，比如办各种数学项目，其中很多努力最终会被浪费掉，因为你所描述的那些社会基础并不存在？
格拉德威尔： 是的，你必须先有某种基础。不过回到肯尼亚跑者这个例子。让长跑保持百分之九十的兑现率，其实是极其浪费的。你并不真的希望有一百万个十二岁孩子每天跑十英里，因为奥运代表队只有三四个名额。你希望他们去做一些最终能有回报的事。所以那其实不是一个我们该效仿的模式，我们的长跑兑现率只有百分之一，这可能是件好事，我们只是不该为此在成绩上叫苦而已。
但是还有一整类别的可能性。我最近跟一些人聊过一个相当疯狂的主意：假如我们建立一套制度，让个人、团体或者非营利机构能够从提高兑现率当中获利，会怎么样？
比方说，我走进洛杉矶南部中心区，接手一个一年级的班。从精算的角度看，以这些孩子的社会经济背景，我基本可以断定，二三十年后他们缴纳的联邦所得税大概接近于零。因为如今你得真的挤进中产阶级才谈得上纳税，而南部中心区最糟糕的那些街区里，最终跻身中产的孩子少之又少。所以，如果我们把「兑现」定义为进入中产阶级并缴纳联邦所得税，那么那个街区的兑现率基本上是零。
那么假设我对所有人宣布：谁能把这群孩子的兑现率提上去，我就把他们缴的联邦税分给你一部分。就好比你可以对一群孩子做风险投资。我只是把这当作一个思想实验来讲。既然我们现在从这些孩子身上拿到的联邦税收是零，那么这样说又有什么不对：如果你张三愿意在这个班的孩子身上投资二十五年，我就把他们未来税收的百分之五十永久分给你。换句话说，如果你能从这三十个孩子里弄出三个程序员和两个医生，你就会成为一个非常非常有钱的人。顺便说一句，社会因此好得多，孩子们也会更快乐，因为他们将拥有今天所没有的东西：一个真心关注他们、并且有能力提高他们兑现率的人，把那个比率从零提到百分之十、十五、二十，或者三十五。
我知道，你把这种想法讲给别人听，很多人第一反应是，这听上去实在……不管这个主意有什么毛病，它都比我们现在的状况好得多，因为现在根本没人管这些孩子。
但重点在于，兑现率这套思路会改变讨论的方向。我实在受够了那种没完没了的、荒谬的、令人精疲力竭的对「能力」的执念，那根本不是重点。这套思路把我们从那里拉开，转向对已经存在的能力的开发利用，而这是一个理性得多的出发点。如果我们已经竭尽全力去开发能力，结果仍然看到差距，那我们再来谈天赋。如果美国真有两千五百万中学生每天跑十二英里，我们在奥运会一万米上还是被人打得落花流水，那我关于我们和东非人之间基因差异的任何论证我都愿意洗耳恭听。但在我们做到那一步之前，这种争论毫无意义。所以我认为，我们在兑现率的问题上必须更有想象力。
提问者： 会不会是因为我们的跑者被分散到了足球、冰球、长曲棍球、橄榄球、棒球、篮球里？我们把人才池摊到了比肯尼亚多得多的项目上。
格拉德威尔： 对，这正是我的意思，两者根本没有可比性。正因为这两种文化在兑现运动才能的方式上存在如此巨大的差异，你就不可能从中得出任何关于能力的结论。
牙买加与短跑
主持人： 在马尔科姆继续讲下去之前，我得插一句，他一会儿就得离开这栋楼，因为他还要去盖茨基金会做一场演讲，我猜他会在那里说服他们把钱投到这些孩子身上，或者别的什么。我知道大家都想要书，马尔科姆已经预先签好了很多本。所以我的问题是：我们可以让马尔科姆再回答十五分钟问题，然后他上车过桥；或者他可以给你们其中很少的一部分人签名并写上赠言。我想我们还是继续提问吧。好，角落里那位。
提问者： 还是在兑现率的框架里。你刚才谈到跑者，我是个田径迷。牙买加这个岛只有一百来万人，我想现在大概一百五十万，却产出了多得不成比例的短跑选手，还有不少是代表别的国家出赛的。你觉得这也属于同一回事吗？哪怕他们的人口池子这么小。
格拉德威尔： 你们知道我母亲是牙买加人，所以我在回答这个问题时，天然倾向于给牙买加最漂亮的说法。牙买加是一个绝佳的例子。在关于跑步、尤其是短跑的「先天还是后天」这场长期争论里，牙买加所谓的基因池并不比世界上其他许多国家更特别，可牙买加在短跑上却是绝对的统治者。这明显是一个兑现率的案例，牙买加短跑的兑现率一定接近百分之九十。
除了亲身见闻我没有别的证据。圣诞节我刚去牙买加看表亲。我是个跑步的人，所以我就在姨妈家附近的小山上跑。那场面太好笑了，别的地方我从没遇到过：在牙买加，有人在跑步这件事本身，就会在路过的每一个人心里点起一把火。我沿着路跑，有人会放慢车速冲我挥手；有个下班往回走的家伙本来拖着步子，一见我就喊「跑！跑！跑！」，然后追上来陪我跑一段。就是这样。我意识到，这是一种痴迷，彻头彻尾的痴迷。跑步这件事本身承载了太多的社会地位，以至于你只要在这方面稍微有一点点能力，你就会去开发它。而尤塞恩·博尔特如今的地位是，自鲍勃·马利之后再没有人能点燃这样一种举国的热情。所以我觉得，这是我所讲的道理的一个绝佳例证。
观念转变有多快
提问者： 你说这一切都和社会看重什么有关。那你有没有研究过，一次社会价值观的转变，要多久才能对人们的兑现率产生影响？因为我们正在进入政治生活的一个新阶段，我想我们很多人都盼着一些新的价值观冒出来。那些东西要多久才能生效？
格拉德威尔： 在这一点上我是个不折不扣的乐观主义者，我相信这类转变可以发生得非常快。我们还是拿体育举例，因为体育是一个特别清爽的例子。想想《教育法修正案第九条》（Title IX）之后发生了什么。
前几天我见了一位朋友，她有个十二岁的女儿，她自己四十多岁。她聊起自己那一代和女儿这一代的差别。我这位朋友是个爱运动的人，身体条件没什么问题，可她小时候完全没有参加过任何运动项目。她在罗德岛普罗维登斯一个中上层家庭长大，那可不是什么穷乡僻壤，是东海岸。可她从来就没想过要去搞体育，一次都没有。而在她女儿的生活里，体育就是一切。当然不是字面意义上的一切，功课的量和当年一样，可她女儿参加的正式比赛多到她根本记不过来。
这就是兑现率。仅仅二十五年或者三十年前，我们在女性足球或者女性篮球上的兑现率是多少？百分之五？百分之二？百分之三？今天是百分之五十、六十、七十。这只用了一代人。这是我们在这个领域里的优先次序上一次惊人的转变。这让我对我们在其他更要紧的领域里改变兑现率的能力，抱有深深的乐观。因为说到底，这并不是一个多么要紧的领域。可如果我们在足球上都能做到，我觉得我们在别的各种事情上也能做到。
奴隶制的长影
格拉德威尔： 你刚才举手了？
提问者： 我没有问题，我是在替你指人。
格拉德威尔： 那太谢谢你了。请说。
提问者： 我的问题正好相反，你刚才讲的是文化的正面作用，我想问文化在历史上的负面作用。就拿奴隶制来说，它的影响非常长久。你怎么看黑人社群里的异类？再加上奥巴马这个因素，你觉得他会带来什么影响，需要多久？
格拉德威尔： 这个问题问的是反面，是奴隶制这样的历史遗产如何影响了机会。我书里的最后一章是很私人的一章，写的是我母亲家族的故事，那一章就是在试着回答这个问题。
我母亲是一个棕色皮肤的牙买加人。任何人看她的一生，都会认为那是成功的一生：她在牙买加山中一间小小的农舍里长大，最后成了加拿大的中上层专业人士。我试着用书里那些观念来讲她的故事，重点不放在她自己的胆识和聪明上，而是去问：是哪些机会让她走到了那一步？
我谈到的其中一件事，是做一个棕色皮肤的牙买加人的特殊之处。我把母亲的家族史一直追溯到十八世纪：一个爱尔兰种植园主来到牙买加，把一个非洲女奴收作侍妾，我敢肯定那是买来的、被强暴的。这就是我母亲这一支的起点，他们的儿子叫约翰·福特。
在牙买加，一个十八世纪的混血结合所生下的孩子，不会像美国南方那样被重新推回奴隶身份。恰恰相反，英国人做了一件非常不同的事：如果你是混血，你会被接纳进统治阶层。所以约翰·福特，一个离奴隶船只有一代之遥的人，成了一名传教士，一个能读会写、受过教育的自由人。那大概是 1790 年前后的事。他的孩子是自由人，一代又一代都是。如果你顺着我母亲的家族史往下捋，同时也捋一捋其他那些平行的棕色皮肤牙买加家族的历史，你会看到一份世代相传的特权，一代压着一代往下传，你会看到一批人早在十九世纪最初的那些年头就已经是商人、企业主和专业人士了。
这给了他们一种身份和一整套机会，而这些是那些被重新推回奴隶制的人所得不到的。他们在美国的对应者，没有在 1790 年被拎出来、被允许接受教育，而是被推回去，又当了三代奴隶。我母亲的起点，和她的祖先如果在佐治亚或者阿拉巴马时她可能有的起点，中间隔着一整个世界。
顺着这条线，还有一件有意思的事。哈佛的非裔美国人研究教授「斯基普」·盖茨做过一系列非常精彩的家谱研究，对象是那些声名卓著、事业有成的非裔美国人。他发现，几乎无一例外，只要你往上追溯几代，你会找到这样一个人：要么是在解放黑奴之前就获得自由的奴隶，要么是在解放之后的第一代里设法拥有了土地的自由人。换句话说，你又看到了同一件事：今天的成功，是两代、三代、四代、五代之前被创造出来的某个机会的结果。
这提醒我们，当我们谈论这枚硬币的另一面时，奴隶制的阴影意味着什么。那些没有拿到我母亲拿到的那张免死金牌的人，那些在盖茨所研究的名单之外的人，你的祖先被剥夺了那张免死金牌这件事，直到今天仍然作数。
至于你问的奥巴马，他的成功告诉了我们什么关于这份遗产是否仍然重要？什么也没有告诉我们。什么也没有。我和任何人一样喜欢他，下周二将要发生的事让我兴奋得不能再兴奋，那简直是天崩地裂式的解脱，我说不定都要去入美国籍了。但我们必须说清楚：他的胜利并不意味着这个问题已经结束了。如果我们那样去理解它，我们就犯了一个大错。
提问者： 那我追问一句。对于在座的或者场外的、正在努力帮助你所描述的那类人群的人，有哪些做法值得借鉴，有哪些方向值得他们去看？当然是有异类的，也有不是从贫民区出来的成功者，那里头一定有点什么，可我理解不了。要创造更多的成功故事，有哪些方向值得探索？
格拉德威尔： 我真希望自己能给你一个完整而令人满意的答案，但我不知道。在书里，我就「怎样把数学教给内城区的孩子」这个很窄的问题谈了一点。你能不能让一个内城区的孩子在做数学时像亚洲孩子那样思考？我们认为答案是肯定的。通过改变对待用功的态度来教数学，我们已经看到了非同寻常的成果。这让我觉得我们在其他领域也有各种各样的机会。但那样的努力具体长什么样子，我不知道。我希望别人会去做，我相信已经有人在做了，但我认为我们作为一个社会需要对此了解得更多。
下一篇写什么
主持人： 最后一个问题。
提问者： 你接下来打算写什么？
格拉德威尔： 我有很多很多想法。我先给你们剧透一下我下一篇《纽约客》的文章。手头有两篇在写，一篇是对《杀死一只知更鸟》的攻击。因为事实证明，谁也没在十二岁之后重读过这本书。可你十二岁的时候懂什么呢？什么也不懂。回去重读一遍。我只说这么多。然后你会发现，阿蒂克斯·芬奇是个怪物。总之，即将刊出，敬请期待。
另一篇会更贴近你们的心。细节我不能说，但我可以给你们一个梗概。顺便说一句，这故事实在太酷了，我很久没碰到这么酷的故事了。
我认识了一个来自你们这个世界的人，软件创业者之类，你们知道那种类型：从孟买来，进了加州理工或者麻省理工，兜里揣着三十美元，在硅谷闯出了名堂。他有个女儿，十二岁，想打篮球。他对篮球一窍不通，他是个从孟买来的程序员，但他决定：我要去当我女儿球队的教练。于是他去看了一场篮球比赛，以一个局外人的眼光去观察。我们不是一直在谈局外人吗？他就是个局外人。他看完之后直摇头，心想：这个项目怎么打得这么没脑子？
于是他决定，按他自己的方式教他女儿和她的队友们打球。结果呢？请记住，这支球队全是女孩，都来自山景城那一带，她们的父亲全都是这个人那样的人，她们是程序员的孩子，不是肌肉贲张的彪形大汉，是一群扎着小辫的瘦小女孩。结果她们差一点拿到州冠军。她们没拿到，是因为她们被人用一种极其离谱的方式坑掉了，那也是这个故事最精彩的部分之一。但整个故事的要害在于，它在每一个层面上都堪称天才：当一个从孟买来的绝顶聪明的人决定去当篮球教练，会发生什么？答案是，会发生一些你在篮球场上从来没见过的事。
我只再补一个细节。比赛当中，当他在场边做他那一套，指挥这些扎小辫的女孩时，顺便说一句，这些女孩篮球打得并不好，附言：她们不会去打一级联赛，她们是一群瘦小的女孩，将来都要去加州理工念物理，对体育其实没多大兴趣，只不过眼下受着这位疯癫天才的调教。比赛当中，那些浸淫在旧篮球范式里的对方教练会被眼前发生的事激怒到什么程度呢？他们一开始只是坐在那里目瞪口呆，接着开始冲自己的球员大喊大叫，冲那些十二岁的女孩大喊大叫，好像这是她们的错。然后无一例外，他们会在赛后向这个人挑战，约他到停车场打一架。
总之，这一篇也请留意。谢谢各位。
排版 + 横图 + 来源，粘贴即成稿
章节 · 点击跳转视频
0:01
微软研究院现场与《异类》主旨
1:34
兑现率：弗林留下的那把尺子
4:19
约束一：贫穷与特曼的天才追踪
9:36
约束二：出生月如何决定谁是天才
17:09
约束三：态度与东亚数学优势之谜
26:41
肯尼亚长跑：天赋论的替代解释
29:25
问答：一万小时、年龄与截止日期
34:48
劣势即优势：阅读障碍与大班教学
42:43
局外人的中间人角色与少数族群
53:22
提高兑现率：制度设计的思想实验
61:16
牙买加、Title IX 与奴隶制的长影
71:56
下期预告：知更鸟与孟买篮球教练
本期小问 · 档案清单
0:01
伟大的事业从哪来？
26:41
成功是天赋的证明，还是机会的产物？
9:36
我们的选拔制度在识别天赋，还是在制造天赋？
1:34
一个社会究竟浪费了多少本可兑现的人？
本期讲者
马尔科姆·格拉德威尔《纽约客》专职撰稿人，加拿大裔作家，母亲为牙买加人。著有《引爆点》《决断两秒间》，本场演讲围绕 2008 年新书《异类》，主张成功来自机会结构与文化遗产，而非个人天赋。
主持人微软研究院讲座系列的现场主持，负责介绍讲者、控制问答节奏，并在结尾提示格拉德威尔随后要赴盖茨基金会演讲。
01微软研究院现场与《异类》主旨
0:01
each year Microsoft research hosts hundreds of influential speakers from around the world including leading scientists renowned experts in technology book authors and leading academics and makes videos of these lectures freely [Music] available okay so Mr Gladwell is here today to discuss his new book outliers outliers is a book about success it's starts with a very simple question what is the difference between those who do something special with their lives and everyone else the book explores this question by examining the lives of the remarkable Among Us the brilliant the exceptional and the unusual through his book we learn that the way we think about success is all wrong Malcolm Gladwell is a staff writer for the New Yorker and the author of two bestselling books The Tipping Point and blink please join me in welcoming Malcolm Gladwell to Microsoft thank you it's a real pleasure to be here um you know I don't work in a office I work at home and I I forget what offices are like and I was around the corner and I uh I saw this big open refrigerator with all kinds of softs I was like how cool is that um I um I uh so I'm going to talk about my new book which um you know there are many things in it and I can say all
每年，微软研究院都会邀请来自世界各地的数百位有影响力的演讲者，包括顶尖科学家、知名技术专家、图书作者和著名学者，并把这些讲座的视频免费[音乐]提供给大家。好，格拉德威尔先生今天来这里，是要谈谈他的新书《异类》。《异类》是一本关于成功的书，它从一个非常简单的问题开始：那些用自己的人生做出了不凡之事的人，和其他所有人之间，究竟差别在哪里？这本书通过审视我们身边那些非凡之人——聪明的、卓越的、与众不同的人——的人生来探讨这个问题。读完这本书我们会明白，我们看待成功的方式全都错了。马尔科姆·格拉德威尔是《纽约客》的专职撰稿人，也是两本畅销书《引爆点》和《决断两秒间》的作者。请和我一起欢迎马尔科姆·格拉德威尔来到微软。谢谢，非常高兴来到这里。嗯，你们知道，我不在办公室工作，我在家里工作，所以我都快忘了办公室是什么样子了。我刚才在拐角那边，看到一个敞开的大冰箱，里面全是各种汽水，我心想，这也太酷了吧。嗯，我今天要讲讲我的新书，你们知道，里面有很多内容，我可以讲各
02兑现率：弗林留下的那把尺子
1:34
kinds of um things about it but I I thought I would talk about an idea that is actually not in the book but um that I've been thinking about a lot uh since writing it and which um encapsulates a lot of what the book is about and it's um it's this idea that's called uh capitalization and it um is a a concept that a a very brilliant psychologist named James Flynn has written a lot about those of you who know something about IQ research will have heard of the Flynn effect that's James Flynn's idea and he's written a lot about this concept of of capitalization which is um what is the rate at which a society capitalizes on its potential other words what percentage of people who are capable of doing something actually end up doing that thing right how efficiently do we make use of uh the talents within a given group of people so let me give you an example um don't know how many of you read Michael Lewis's book uh The Blind Side which is this extraordinary book about a young man um in East Memphis a teenager who's 6 fo six and 350 pounds and he's discovered by and adopted by a wealthy white family and they realize that he's an extraordinary athlete and they um they work with him until he becomes um uh one of the finest offensive um lineman in the country and in fact he's about to be drafted into the NFLs as
各种各样的东西，但我想我还是讲一个其实并不在书里的想法吧，一个我写完书之后一直在思考的想法，它其实概括了这本书的很多核心内容。这个概念叫做「资本化率」（capitalization），是一位非常出色的心理学家詹姆斯·弗林写过很多的一个概念。你们当中了解智商研究的人应该听说过「弗林效应」，那就是詹姆斯·弗林提出的。他写了很多关于「资本化」这个概念的东西，也就是：一个社会把自身潜能转化利用的比率有多高？换句话说，那些有能力做某件事的人当中，最终真正做成那件事的比例是多少？我们对一个特定人群中的才能，利用得有多高效？我举个例子。不知道你们有多少人读过迈克尔·刘易斯的《弱点》，那是一本很了不起的书，讲的是孟菲斯东区一个年轻人的故事，一个身高六英尺六、体重三百五十磅的少年。他被一个富裕的白人家庭发现并收养，他们意识到他是个非凡的运动员，于是一直培养他，直到他成为全美最优秀的进攻锋线球员之一。事实上，他即将被选入NFL
2:58
many years later and make a kajillion dollars and um they um it's this extraordinary story but the part of it that I always um stayed with me when I read it was right at the very end the kid whose name is Michael oer says he's from the slums of Memphis east Memphis and he says if everyone um who I grew up with um who was who was into football who had real ability in football actually ended up playing football um they need to have two national football leagues and what he was saying was that um that East Memphis did not do a very good job of capitalizing on its athletic ability right and so Lewis actually follows up on this and he he does this he talks to some people in the East Memphis school system and he asked them what percentage of kids in East Memphis who get a uh college athletic scholarship um actually end up going to college and the answer was one and six which absolutely floored me because I would have thought that when it comes if there was one thing in America that we were really good at doing it would be exploiting the athletic ability of our youth in particular of our of our African-American youth I would have thought that in an inner city area the capitalization rate for sports would have been 90% but in fact what we learn in East
多年之后还会赚到一大笔钱。这是一个非常了不起的故事，但让我读完之后一直难忘的是结尾的部分。这个孩子叫迈克尔·奥赫，他说他来自孟菲斯的贫民区，孟菲斯东区。他说，如果我从小一起长大的那些人当中，所有喜欢橄榄球、真正有橄榄球天赋的人最后都去打了橄榄球，那得有两个国家橄榄球联盟才够。他的意思其实是，孟菲斯东区在把当地的运动天赋「资本化」这件事上做得非常糟糕。刘易斯后来还跟进调查了这一点，他去找了孟菲斯东区学校系统里的一些人，问他们：孟菲斯东区拿到大学体育奖学金的孩子当中，最后真正去上了大学的比例有多少？答案是六分之一。这让我震惊极了，因为我原本以为，如果说美国有哪件事是我们真的做得特别在行的，那一定就是发掘年轻人、尤其是非裔美国年轻人的运动天赋。我本以为在内城区，体育方面的资本化率应该有百分之九十。但事实上，我们在孟菲斯东区看到的
03约束一：贫穷与特曼的天才追踪
4:19
Memphis is that the capitalization rate is 1 in six it's 16% right so now think about it if in something that we care about as much as sports right something we there's possibly nothing in American society that we devote more time and attention intellectual resources to than the maximization of the professional sporting experience in something that we care that much about our cap rate is 16% so how high must it be in things that we don't care that much about right that's a very sobering notion and it says that as a society we have an awful lot long way to go uh towards properly maximizing um the human potential of our members and so I realized when I thought about that book that outliers is really about that question it's about identifying sources of constraints on capitalization rates and figuring out how um how to remove them so what I thought i' do was just sort of talk about a variety of these constraints what are the kinds of things that lower cap rates in any number of different areas of human endeavor um so one obvious one is poverty um when that kid Michael oer who grows up in East Memphis um talks about um what a tiny fraction of the kids he grew up with who had athletic ability
是，资本化率只有六分之一，也就是16%。你想想看，在一件我们如此在意的事情上——体育，在美国社会里，可能没有任何一件事比「把职业体育体验最大化」投入了更多的时间、注意力和智力资源——在这么一件我们如此在意的事情上，我们的资本化率只有16%，那么在那些我们不那么在意的事情上，这个比率又会是多高呢？这是个非常发人深省的想法，它说明作为一个社会，我们在真正最大化成员的人类潜能这件事上，还有很长很长的路要走。所以当我想到那本书的时候，我意识到，《异类》其实讲的就是这个问题：它是在找出那些限制资本化率的因素，并想办法把它们去掉。所以我想，我今天就来聊聊这些限制因素，看看有哪些东西会在人类活动的各个领域里拉低资本化率。有一个显而易见的因素，就是贫穷。刚才那个在孟菲斯东区长大的孩子迈克尔·奥赫，说到和他一起长大的、有运动天赋的孩子里，只有极小一部分
5:38
actually end up going to college what he's talking about is poverty East Memphis is one of the poorest neighborhoods in the United States and we know that um that that kind of poverty makes it very very difficult for those who have an ability to do something to actually end up doing that very thing and um that's sort of an obvious constraint on capitalization but one of the things I think um is uh uh is true of poverty is that we tend even as we acknowledge its importance in constraining capitalization we underestimate just what a powerful constraint it is and let me give you an example in the book I talk about um the famous terman study that was done in California this is a study done in the 20s began in the 20s in California and terman who is a psychologist at Stanford in fact the terman um who uh was the first dean of engineering at Stanford in fact isn't there a hall called terman Hall at Stanford how many you go to Stanford that's this guy's son anyway little side fact for those of you who went to Stanford um uh he does this thing where he he gives an IQ test to 250,000 uh California school children and he basically identifies the top one top .1% so kids with IQs of 140 plus genius level essentially um um and he tracks those kids for the rest of their
最后上了大学，他说的其实就是贫穷。孟菲斯东区是全美最贫穷的社区之一，我们知道，那种程度的贫穷会让一个有能力做某件事的人，非常非常难真正去做成那件事。这算是对资本化的一个显而易见的限制。但我觉得贫穷有一点很关键：即便我们承认它在限制资本化方面很重要，我们还是低估了它的限制力有多强。我举个例子。书里我讲到了在加州做的那项著名的特曼研究，这项研究开始于二十年代的加州。特曼是斯坦福的一位心理学家——事实上，那位当过斯坦福首任工程学院院长的特曼，斯坦福不是有座楼叫特曼楼吗？你们有多少人是斯坦福毕业的？那是这个人的儿子。总之，给斯坦福出来的各位一个小花絮。他做了这么一件事：他给二十五万名加州中小学生做了智商测试，然后基本上挑出了最顶尖的那0.1%，也就是智商140以上、基本上属于天才级别的孩子。然后他追踪这些孩子余下的
7:02
lives for 50 years and he's trying to figure out um what happens to them and it's his notion starting out that he's ident he thinks because he he's so invested in the notion that IQ is the single most determinant of Life success he thinks what he's done is identified the cohort who will turn out to be the leaders in Academia in in Academia in industry in the people who will end up you know running all the organizations and being the top politicians and the top intellectuals right so he follows them and follows them for over the course of 20 and 30 years and 20 and 30 years in he realizes actually it's not true at all and that these kids turn out as when they turn out to be adults they have a variety of uh strikingly different Fates there is a small group that does um very well the top uh 15% do actually occupy positions of real prominence in society then there's a big group in the middle who have pretty average lives um and remember these are kids with adults with genius level IQs and the majority of them do they're kind of like have moderately successful professional lives and then there is a chunk at the bottom who have who are by any measure um failures who have whose lives turn out by um by any kind of Occupational yard stick to be um massively disappointing who make do who do do not seem to make use of their
一生，追踪了五十年，想搞清楚他们后来都怎么样了。他一开始的想法是——因为他非常笃信智商是人生成功最重要的决定因素——他认为自己找出来的，是未来会在学术界、在产业界成为领袖的那一批人，是将来会掌管各种机构、成为顶尖政治家和顶尖知识分子的那些人。于是他一直追踪他们，追踪了二三十年，而在二三十年之后他发现，其实完全不是这么回事。这些孩子长大成人之后，命运出现了惊人的分化。有一小群人过得非常好，最顶尖的那15%确实占据了社会上真正显要的位置；然后中间有一大群人，过着相当普通的生活——记住，这些可是天才级智商的孩子、成年人——他们中的大多数只是过着还算小有成就的职业生涯；然后底部还有一批人，无论用什么标准衡量都算是失败者，他们的人生按任何职业标准来看都极其令人失望，他们勉强度日，似乎完全没有用上自己
8:25
extraordinary human potential at all and the question that terman has to wrestle with is why did that group fail what's the difference between this group who did beautifully well and this group who did so poorly at the bottom and he runs through I mean this question obviously obsesses him and he runs through every conceivable explanation for that difference and he says is it their personalities and it's not he says is it their um is it uh their their habits is it their and it goes on and on down the list and he realizes in the end that the answer is really really simple and that is that the kids who did best these genius kids who ended up succeeding in the world were the ones who came from wealthy households and that the genius level kids who ended up utter failures in life were the ones who were born into poor families right Born Into families where parents hadn't gone to college where there weren't books in the home where there wasn't the kind of cultural and institutional support for a habit of learning and a habit of intellectual activity what he was saying in other words that even if you endow a child with a brain that is a one a billion brain that is not sufficient to ensure the success of that child that poverty
那非凡的人类潜能。特曼必须面对的问题是：那一群人为什么失败了？表现极好的这群人和垫底表现极差的这群人，差别到底在哪里？这个问题显然让他非常着迷，他把所有能想到的解释都过了一遍。他问：是性格的原因吗？不是。是他们的习惯吗？就这样一项一项往下排查。最后他意识到，答案其实非常非常简单：那些表现最好的孩子——那些最终在世界上取得成功的天才孩子——都来自富裕家庭；而那些人生彻底失败的天才级孩子，都出生在贫困家庭。出生在父母没上过大学的家庭，家里没有书，也没有那种支持学习习惯和智力活动习惯的文化与制度支撑。换句话说，他想说的是：即便你赋予一个孩子一个十亿里挑一的大脑，那也不足以保证这个孩子成功；贫穷
04约束二：出生月如何决定谁是天才
9:36
is such a powerful constraint on capitalization that it can reduce that genius child to a lifetime of worse than mediocrity a lifetime of really profound um disappointment so that's the that's the first constraint like I say it's the obvious constraint but I think it's important to impress on on for all of us to understand um that poverty is probably a bigger con straint than we think um particularly those of us who are not intimately connected with it we may tend to underestimate um what an extraordinary impact that has on on limiting people's ability to do well so let's talk about some other constraints that are maybe less obvious um I got really interested in this book in looking at the composition of elite sports teams and um and if you do that you find all kind find out all kinds of strange things so at one point um I looked at the roster of the 2007 Junior check hockey team now I did not pick that team for any I picked that team at random I just was interested in that's an elite team it was the second or third best junior hockey team in the world after of course the Canadians I'm Canadian um and so it's a it's a really elite team these are the kind of kids who go on to play in the NHL or in the elite um uh adult leagues in in um in
对资本化的限制强大到，它能把一个天才儿童压成一辈子还不如平庸的人生，一辈子深深的失望。这就是第一个限制因素。就像我说的，它是显而易见的那一个，但我觉得很重要的是，要让我们所有人都记住：贫穷可能是一个比我们以为的更大的限制，尤其是我们这些和贫穷没什么切身接触的人，我们可能会低估它对限制一个人取得成就有多大的影响。那我们再说说另外一些也许没那么明显的限制因素。写这本书的时候，我对精英体育队伍的人员构成产生了很大兴趣，如果你去研究这个，你会发现各种各样奇怪的现象。有一次，我看了2007年捷克青年冰球队的名单。我挑这支队伍没有什么特别原因，是随机挑的，我只是感兴趣，那是一支精英队伍，当时是世界上第二或第三好的青年冰球队，当然排在加拿大队之后——我是加拿大人。所以这是一支非常精英的队伍，这些孩子后来都会去打NHL，或者去打欧洲的精英
10:52
Europe so I'm going to read to you the birth dates of the members of that National Check team 2007 January 3rd January 3rd January 12th February 8th February 10th February 17th February 20th February 24th March 5th March 10th March 26th April 22nd May 5th June 6th July 2nd July 19th July 20th August 15th August 25th August 31st November 29th and December 31st um now what's strange about that list did you notice 11 of the 20 names are born in January February and March it is a massively skewed distribution of birth dates towards the first three months of the year now that is not something idiosyncratic to the 19 to the 2007 Czech junior hockey team in fact if you look at any Elite hockey team anywhere in the world and for that matter any elite soccer team anywhere in the world you will see the same skewed distribution you will see that an overwhelming number of the members of those teams are born in January February and March now why is that uh the answer is that the eligibility cuto offs for age-class hockey and soccer uh throughout the world is
成人联赛。所以我来给你们念一念2007年捷克国家队队员的出生日期：1月3日、1月3日、1月12日、2月8日、2月10日、2月17日、2月20日、2月24日、3月5日、3月10日、3月26日、4月22日、5月5日、6月6日、7月2日、7月19日、7月20日、8月15日、8月25日、8月31日、11月29日、12月31日。那么这份名单有什么奇怪的地方？你们注意到了吗？二十个人里有十一个出生在1月、2月和3月。出生日期的分布极度偏向一年的头三个月。而这并不是2007年捷克青年冰球队独有的怪现象。事实上，如果你去看世界上任何地方的任何一支精英冰球队，甚至世界上任何地方的任何一支精英足球队，你都会看到同样的偏斜分布：你会看到这些队伍中绝大多数队员都出生在1月、2月和3月。这是为什么呢？答案是，全世界年龄分组的冰球和足球比赛，参赛资格的截止日期都是
12:13
January 1st and in both those Sports we very very aggressively recruit the best and the brightest kids at a very early age so we go and we look at a at a at a group of 10-year-olds and we watch them play hockey or soccer and we pick the best right and we select them out we put them on all-star teams and we give special coaching and extra practice time and more games and encourage them and encourage them right thinking that is the best way to capitalize on the talent pool in that particular sport but think about it when you're 10 years old who's going to be the best at a particular activity physical activity the oldest kids right the kid who was born in January has 10 months of maturity on the Kid born in October and when you're 10 years old 10 months is an extraordinary long period of time it's can be the it can be three or 4 in in height it can be a difference between between being clumsy and being massively coordinated so we think we are picking the best and we're not we're picking the oldest right and then we take the oldest and we give them special coaching and all kinds of extra opportunities and all kinds of extra games and lo and behold 10 years
1月1日。而在这两项运动里，我们都非常非常积极地在很小的年纪就去挑选那些最优秀、最有天赋的孩子。所以我们跑去看一群十岁的孩子，看他们打冰球或者踢足球，然后挑出最好的那些，把他们选出来，编进全明星队，给他们专门的教练指导、额外的训练时间、更多的比赛，不断地鼓励他们，认为这是把这项运动的人才库资本化的最佳方式。但你想想看，当你十岁的时候，谁会在某项体力活动上表现最好？年纪最大的孩子。1月出生的孩子比10月出生的孩子多了十个月的发育。而在十岁的时候，十个月是一段极其漫长的时间，可能意味着身高差三四英寸，可能意味着一个笨手笨脚、一个协调性极好。所以我们以为自己挑的是最好的，其实不是，我们挑的是年纪最大的。然后我们把年纪最大的挑出来，给他们专门的指导、各种额外的机会、各种额外的比赛，于是十年
13:17
later they really are the best right but it's a self-fulfilling prophecy right we created the conditions that made them the best and foolishly thought we were actually identifying um real talent now you only have to look at that and realize what an extraordinary constraint um on capitalization that is right logic would tell us that the distribution of hockey ability or soccer ability should be even throughout the year there by rights should be as many great soccer players or hockey players born in December as January but when we look at these teams and we see they're overwhelmingly waited for the first three months of the year that suggests that we are um that the capitalist ation rate for hockey it's must be less than 50% right we are leaving all of the talent born in the second half of the year on the table now there's clearly a very easy solution to that problem and that is that when we put together leagues of uh uh for soccer soccer and hockey and any other sport um in the age class um Arena we should have different streams for kids born in different months we should have three parallel leagues one for kids born in the first four months of the year one for kids born in the middle
之后，他们还真的就成了最好的。但这是一个自我实现的预言，是我们创造了让他们成为最好的条件，却愚蠢地以为自己真的是在识别真正的天赋。你只要看到这一点，就会意识到这对资本化是多么巨大的一个限制。按道理讲，冰球天赋或足球天赋的分布应该是全年均匀的，12月出生的伟大足球运动员或冰球运动员，理应和1月出生的一样多。可当我们去看这些队伍，发现它们压倒性地偏向一年的头三个月，这就说明冰球的资本化率一定低于50%——我们把下半年出生的所有天赋都白白浪费掉了。这个问题显然有一个非常简单的解决办法：当我们在年龄分组的层面上组织足球、冰球以及任何其他运动的联赛时，我们应该按孩子出生的月份分成不同的赛道。我们应该有三个平行的联赛：一个给出生在年度前四个月的孩子，一个给出生在中间
14:30
four months and one for kids born in the last four months right and have them develop independently until they're in their mid- teens and then select it's a really simple way and if we did that we would double or triple our capitalization of talent in that particular realm now why don't we do that right because we refuse to admit that our own rules arbitrary rules constrain capitalization and we cling to a naive belief that these meritocracies that we have constructed in this particular realm um are entirely rational and efficient and fair so this is a second constraint on capitalization it's the stupidity constraint right it is our inability to understand that there is something deeply arbitrary and unfair in the way we have written the rules on which a meritocracy exists right now for those of you who think that that is a minor issue and that so what if those kids can't play hockey you know why can't they just play another um sport let me remind you that this is true of many sports I'm going to I'll I'll um I'm going to give you the the birth dates of the 2007 Czech uh junior soccer team ready January 1st January 3rd January 5th January 12th January 26 January 27th February 1st February 14th February 20th February 21st February
四个月的孩子，还有一个给出生在最后四个月的孩子，让他们各自独立发展，直到十五六岁再来选拔。这是个非常简单的办法，如果我们这么做，我们在这个领域对天赋的资本化率就能翻一倍甚至两倍。那我们为什么不这么做呢？因为我们不肯承认我们自己定的规则——那些武断的规则——限制了资本化，我们死抱着一种天真的信念，以为我们在这个领域里建立起来的精英选拔机制完全是理性的、高效的、公平的。所以这是对资本化的第二个限制：愚蠢限制。也就是说，我们没有能力认识到，我们在书写这套精英体制所依赖的规则时，其中存在着某种极其武断和不公平的东西。如果你们当中有人觉得这只是个小问题，觉得那些孩子打不了冰球又怎样，他们去玩别的运动不就行了，那我提醒你们，很多运动都是这样。我来念一念2007年捷克青年足球队的出生日期，准备好了：1月1日、1月3日、1月5日、1月12日、1月26日、1月27日、2月1日、2月14日、2月20日、2月21日、2月
15:50
24th March 15th March 26th March 29th April 16th May 20th May 26th June 22nd June 24th August August 18th and September 26th that if that's not a con a stupidity constraint on capitalization on football ability um um soccer ability in a country by the way that cares more about football than you know perhaps any other I don't know what is right that's a and I you know we need to take in other words very seriously the question of um how we choose to structure um systems of uh meritocratic systems and this also you can apply this exact same logic um to Educational Opportunity if you look at um how well kids do in school based purely on their birth dates on whether they fall into the youngest oldest or middle uh age cohort in their class you see exactly the same patterns in fact there's a beautiful study done recently that tracked thousands and thousands of kids across the west and track them all the way through to their University level and found that kids born in the um relatively youngest cohort of their age class um were 11% less likely to go to college than kids
24日、3月15日、3月26日、3月29日、4月16日、5月20日、5月26日、6月22日、6月24日、8月18日、9月26日。如果这还不算是对足球天赋资本化的一种愚蠢限制——顺便说一句，这个国家对足球的在乎程度可能超过其他任何国家——那我真不知道什么才算了。所以换句话说，我们需要非常认真地对待这个问题：我们该如何去构建那些精英选拔的制度。同样的逻辑你也可以原封不动地套用到教育机会上。如果你只看孩子的出生日期——看他们在班上属于年龄最小、最大还是中间的那一批——再看他们在学校里的表现，你会看到完全一样的模式。事实上，最近有一项很出色的研究，追踪了西方成千上万的孩子，一路追踪到他们上大学的阶段，发现出生在同年龄组中相对最小的那批孩子，上大学的可能性要比其他孩子低11%
05约束三：态度与东亚数学优势之谜
17:09
born in the relatively oldest um cohort of their of their age class 11% is a huge difference and it says that we are that is 11% of kids whose opportunity is being who whose whose human potential is being squandered right completely for closed why because we are so stupid as to organize our elementary school education without reference to the obvious fact of biological maturity right it is another it is a glaring example of how stupidity constraints um uh dramatically limit um the capitalization of human potential um so third constraint um and I can go on about constraints but I'll stop with the third one um and this is in many ways the most uh fun one and the most controversial one but but I think it's it's worth um digging into um and it's it's what I what I would say is an attitudinal constraint on capitalization um so one of the I have a whole chapter in my book um which is about this question of why it is that Asian kids do so much better at math than their Western counterparts right
出生在同一年龄组里相对最年长的那一批孩子——11% 是一个巨大的差距，它意味着有 11% 的孩子，他们的机会、他们的人类潜能就这样被白白浪费掉了，完全被堵死了。为什么？因为我们蠢到在组织小学教育时，完全不考虑生理成熟度这个再明显不过的事实。这又是一个鲜明的例子，说明愚蠢这种约束会怎样极大地限制人类潜能的兑现。那么第三种约束——关于约束我可以一直讲下去，但我讲到第三个就打住——这一个在很多方面是最有意思、也最有争议的一个，但我觉得值得深挖，我把它称作兑现过程中的“态度性约束”。我书里有一整章就在谈这个问题：为什么亚洲孩子的数学成绩比西方同龄人好那么多。
18:21
now the numbers here are irrefutable and they're extraordinary the differences in uh mathematics performance between uh uh kids in Singapore Hong Kong South Korea uh Japan um and Kids In America Germany England or what have you um the fact we just got a a round of results from these International math test comparisons I think a couple weeks ago and we're talking the difference is not this the difference is is that um and if you look closely at um trying to figure out why it seems to be the case that the difference the reason for that difference has to do with attitudes it has to do with what is the attitude with which the child in those two sets of cultures approaches a math problem and it seems to be the case that when um Asian kids sit down and face a high school math problem they have a different expectation of what solving that problem entails they have an expectation that if they apply effort to the problem the problem is solvable whereas when we look very closely at the attitudes of Western children um they seem to have the attitude that um their ability to solve that math problem is a function of their ability of their innate ability something they either have or they don't right and that attitudinal difference seems to make a
这里的数据是无可辩驳的，而且差距大得惊人。新加坡、香港、韩国、日本的孩子，跟美国、德国、英国等等国家的孩子，在数学成绩上的差距——我想大概几周前我们刚拿到新一轮国际数学测试的比较结果——我们说的差距不是这么一点点，而是这么大。如果你仔细去找原因，似乎这种差距的根源在于态度，在于这两类文化中的孩子面对一道数学题时抱着什么样的态度。看起来是这样的：当亚洲孩子坐下来面对一道中学数学题时，他们对“解开这道题意味着什么”有着不同的预期，他们预期只要肯下功夫，这道题就是能解出来的；而当我们非常仔细地去看西方孩子的态度时，他们似乎认为，自己能不能解出这道数学题，取决于自己的天赋，取决于某种要么有、要么没有的先天能力。而这种态度上的差异，似乎产生了
19:41
um a Prof have a profound effect on the ability of kids to do well at math because as it turns out the Asian approach to mathematics is the correct one when I say correct let me give you an example so these International math tests that we give um to kids around the world they called Tims we give the Tims every four years it's the same test to kids all over the world and um and that's how we come up with these rankings of how countries do well when we give the Tims to kids um at the same time as we give them the math test we give them a questionnaire and the questionnaire is really long it's 120 questions long and it asks them all kinds of questions about that will be useful to researchers so how many hours do you study do your parents encourage you do you like M you know all those kinds of things but it's really really long and it's so long in fact that most kids don't finish the questionnaire it's just too too long right so a couple years ago this really brilliant guy um called earling bow at Penn uh decided he would rank the countries of the world by what percentage of questions on the questionnaire their kids finished right and you know what he found when he did that ranking and compared it to the ranking of countries on the World by what percentage of questions on the math
一种极其深远的影响，影响了孩子们学好数学的能力。因为事实证明，亚洲人对待数学的这套方式才是正确的。我说“正确”，举个例子。我们给全世界孩子做的这些国际数学测试叫 TIMSS，每四年考一次，全世界孩子做同一份卷子，各国排名就是这么来的。在给孩子们考 TIMSS 的同时，我们还会让他们填一份问卷，这份问卷特别长，有 120 道题，问各种对研究者有用的问题：你每天学习几小时、父母鼓不鼓励你、你喜不喜欢数学，诸如此类。但它实在太长了，长到大多数孩子根本填不完。所以几年前，宾夕法尼亚大学一位非常聪明的学者 Erling Boe 决定，按照各国孩子问卷完成率来给世界各国排个名。你猜他把这个排名跟各国孩子数学卷子
20:55
test their kids got right the two rankings were exactly the same and when I say exactly the same I mean there was a correlation of. n. n in the history of social science there has never been a correlation of 0. n between two it's the same thing when we if you want to know how good a country does at mathematics in other words you don't have to ask that those that country's kids any math questions you just have to make them do a task that requires them to sit down at a seat for an extended period of time and focus on a task right and if they can do it they're good at math really really fascinating in other words what we're saying is when we look at um uh Asian cultures what we are seeing is this this difference in mathematical ability what we're seeing is not some underlying difference in Talent OR aptitude for mathematics but a difference in capitalization that Asian the Asian cultural attitude about work has the result of being a far more efficient way of capitalizing on math ability than Western attitudes towards work and that tells us um where the deficit in our um mathematical education in the Western World lies it's not in our curriculum it's not in the quality of our teachers it's not in the size of our classrooms it's not in the amount of
答对率的排名一比，结果如何？两个排名一模一样。我说“一模一样”，意思是相关系数高得离谱——在社会科学史上，两个变量之间从来没有出现过这么高的相关。换句话说，这根本就是同一回事。也就是说，如果你想知道一个国家的数学水平怎么样，你根本不需要问那个国家的孩子任何数学题，你只需要让他们做一件需要长时间坐在座位上、专注于一项任务的事情。如果他们做得到，他们的数学就好。真的非常非常有意思。换句话说，我们看亚洲文化时所看到的这种数学能力上的差异，并不是数学天赋或资质上的某种底层差异，而是“兑现率”的差异——亚洲文化对待努力的态度，让它在把数学能力兑现出来这件事上，比西方的工作态度高效得多。这也告诉我们，西方世界数学教育的短板到底在哪里：不在课程，不在教师素质，不在班级规模，也不在我们给学校
22:18
money we spend on schools it is the attitude in the head of the child as he or she sits down in 11th grade and does algebra or calculus right and by the way nor is it a problem in our genes as some people would like to say of there's a whole bizarre argument that westerners have an inferior set of genes when it comes to mathematics than easterners you know a totally uh ludicrous and unnecessary step in this argument no it's about culture it's about a difference in attitude and about their ability to far more efficiently capitalize on um the abilities of their kids um uh now why now why is this the case I mean this is a I'll just digress for a moment um a really really interesting question is okay if Asian cultures have profoundly different attitudes towards effort when it comes to mathematics why right why does that come from and nobody knows um but in my book I Venture what I think is a plausible explanation um and that is that I think it has to do with um uh patterns of effort laid down um in um in his historical agricultural practices uh that when you look what what is the thing that um Hong Kong uh South China South Korea and Japan all have in common and that is they are historically rice growing cultures right and what is distinctive about rice
投入多少钱，而在于一个孩子上到十一年级、坐下来做代数或微积分时，脑子里抱着什么样的态度。顺便说一句，问题也不在我们的基因里——有些人很喜欢这么说，有一整套很离奇的论调，说西方人在数学上的基因天生不如东方人，这在整个论证里是完全荒谬、完全没必要的一步。不，这是文化的问题，是态度差异的问题，是他们能更高效地把孩子的能力兑现出来的问题。那么，为什么会这样呢？我稍微跑题一下：一个非常非常有意思的问题是，如果亚洲文化在数学上对“努力”的态度真的截然不同，那这是从哪儿来的？没有人知道答案。但在书里我提出了一个我认为说得通的解释：我认为这跟历史上农业耕作方式所沉淀下来的努力模式有关。你看，香港、华南、韩国、日本这些地方有什么共同点？它们在历史上都是种水稻的文化。而水稻种植的独特之处在于
23:43
growing it is the most uh labor intensive and Co cognitively complex form of Agriculture known to man um we know so my on my my father's European ancestors in the Middle Ages in northern England uh probably worked a thousand hours a year as peasant Farmers so what that meant was they worked from uh from dawn to noon uh five days a week um on the weekends they drank themselves silly um and during the winter they slept basically um and they got lots I don't know if you know this but a peasant in medieval England got lots and lots and lots of holidays um that peasant's counterpart in South China or Japan in the same period would not have worked $1,000 hour a year they would have worked $3,000 a year for the simple reason that Rice farming is just a whole it is not a not a difference not a not just a difference in degree from wheat farming is a difference in kind it's a whole different way of working it demands that you wake up at dawn and work all the way until dusk it demands that you work on the weekend in fact there's a wonderful um uh uh uh Chinese proverb that I quote in the book which is um a man uh who works dawn to dusk 360 days a year will not go hungry right which is encapsulates the difference between um eastern and western agricultural practices no my peasant
，它是人类已知的农业形态中最耗费劳力、认知上也最复杂的一种。我们知道——比如我父亲那边的欧洲祖先，中世纪在英格兰北部当农民，一年大概劳作一千小时。这意味着什么？意味着他们每周干五天，从黎明干到中午；周末就喝个烂醉；冬天基本就是睡觉。而且他们有很多假期，不知道你们知不知道，中世纪英格兰的农民有非常非常多的节假日。同一时期，华南或日本的农民可不是一年干一千小时，而是一年干三千小时。原因很简单：种水稻跟种小麦不是程度上的差别，而是种类上的差别，是一套完全不同的劳作方式。它要求你天一亮就起来，一直干到天黑；它要求你周末也得干。事实上，我在书里引用了一句很棒的中国谚语，大意是：一年 360 天从早干到晚的人，是不会挨饿的。这句话概括了东西方农业方式的差别。我在英格兰北部的农民
25:15
ancestors in northern England it would be inconceivable that they could call that a proverb they would have said the man who works 175 days a year Dawn to 11 may or may not not be hungry right well my argument is if your culture does that if that's what you guys what you do for a thousand years that attitude is a deeply rooted part of your makeup and when your kids even if they didn't themselves work in a rice Patty when they sit down and face a calculus or an algebra problem that Legacy that attitude towards effort and persistence translates beautifully to that most modern of town s right and that and means that your culture will do a far better job of of of capitalizing um on on on its inability now is that the whole story I don't know probably not there probably all kinds of other um explanations as well and I get into some of them um but I think it is important that when we look at things from this perspective um to try and to try and answer questions using um history and culture as our guide um when you think about problems in other words from the perspective of capitalization I think you look for answers in different places than when you have a far uh more simple or more reductive approach um to these kinds of things now why is this capitalization discussion of
祖先绝不可能有这样一句谚语，他们只会说：一年干 175 天、从黎明干到中午的人，可能挨饿，也可能不挨饿。我的观点是，如果你的文化就是这么干的，如果你们这么干了一千年，那种态度就会深深扎根在你们的性格构成里。于是当你的孩子——哪怕他自己从没在稻田里干过活——坐下来面对一道微积分或代数题时，那份关于努力和坚持的文化遗产，就能极其顺畅地迁移到这类最现代的任务上。这就意味着，你的文化在兑现自身能力这件事上会做得好得多。那这是全部原因吗？我不知道，多半不是，应该还有各种别的解释，书里我也谈到了一些。但我认为重要的是，当我们从这个视角看问题，试着用历史和文化作为线索去回答问题时——换句话说，当你从“兑现”的角度去思考问题时，你会去完全不同的地方寻找答案，而不像用那种简单化、还原论式的方式去看这些事情。那么，为什么关于“兑现”的这场讨论
06肯尼亚长跑：天赋论的替代解释
26:41
capitalization so important um because I think when we look at um uh why certain people or groups succeed in the world our default explanation is always that those differences in success reflect underlying differences um inability um and we forget about how much um poverty uh stupidity and attitudes are far more important constraints on on capitalization you know I remember I'm a I'm a happen I'm a a runner and U um I have observed like most Runners have over the last 25 or 30 years how utterly dominant uh the Kenyans and the Ethiopians have been in long-distance running and um this has prompted all kinds of people to say that this must represent some fundamental difference in underlying levels of ability that there must be something peculiar about the genetic makeup of East Africans that makes them better Runners than um the rest of us that's a talent explanation right but a far more elegant and persuasive and simpler explanation for them is that they have a higher level of capitalization than we do Alberto Salazar who's the Great American marathoner um he um recently pointed out that in Kenya there are probably a million school boys between the age of 10 and 17 years of age who run uh over 10 around 10 to 12 miles a day right a
如此重要？因为我觉得，当我们去看某些人或某些群体为什么能在世上成功时，我们的默认解释总是：这些成就上的差异反映了能力上的底层差异。而我们忘了，贫穷、愚蠢和态度，才是对“兑现”重要得多的约束。我记得——我自己是个跑步的人——过去二三十年里，我和大多数跑者一样，看到肯尼亚人和埃塞俄比亚人在长跑项目上是何等的统治级。这让各种人都跳出来说，这一定反映了某种能力水平上的根本差异，东非人的基因构成里一定有什么特别之处，让他们比我们其他人更能跑。这是一种“天赋解释”。但有一个远为优雅、更有说服力也更简单的解释：他们的兑现率比我们高得多。伟大的美国马拉松选手 Alberto Salazar 最近就指出，在肯尼亚，大概有一百万名 10 到 17 岁的男学生，每天要跑十来英里、大概十到十二英里。一
28:08
million boys running 10 to 12 miles a day between the age of 12 and 17 the same number um in the United States is probably 5,000 if that right so our capitalization rate when it comes to distance running what is it is it it's surely less than 1% right it's probably .5% right how many kids who are capable of being great long-distance runners in the United States ever discover whether they have that um that uh that ability they never do because they never actually do the work necessary to find it but in Kenya how many great distance Runners do they miss if they have a million school boys running 10 miles a day almost none their capitalization rate is probably 95% that's the difference right the difference has to do with what does the culture value and where does it spend its time and ATT ition and how good is it at finding and making and exploiting that kind of human potential they're really good at that when it comes to distance running um and we're not and I think when you think about things that way it powerfully clarifies how you go about improving um our use of human potential it means that you don't give up it means that you don't say look at a group that's not succeeding and say they are incapable of success and say that the problems that
百万个男孩，12 到 17 岁之间，每天跑十到十二英里。而在美国，这个数字大概是五千，能有五千就不错了。那么在长跑这件事上，我们的兑现率是多少？肯定不到 1%，大概只有 0.5%。在美国，有多少本来可以成为伟大长跑运动员的孩子，一辈子都没机会发现自己有这个能力？他们永远不会知道，因为他们从来没有真正去做那些能发现它的训练。而在肯尼亚，他们会漏掉多少个伟大的长跑选手？如果有一百万个男学生每天跑十英里，那几乎一个都不会漏掉，他们的兑现率大概有 95%。差别就在这儿。这个差别取决于：这个文化看重什么，它把时间和注意力花在哪里，以及它有多擅长去发现、培养和利用那种人类潜能。在长跑这件事上，他们非常擅长，而我们不擅长。我认为，当你这样去思考问题时，它会非常有力地厘清：我们该怎样去改进对人类潜能的利用。它意味着你不该放弃，意味着你不该看着一个不成功的群体就说他们没有成功的能力，说他们面对的问题
07问答：一万小时、年龄与截止日期
29:25
they face are too powerful to inate to in Grain for us to do anything about the capitalization argument I think um enables us it empowers us it tells us that we can actually make a profound difference in how well people turn out if we choose to pay attention to the constraints imposed by poverty by stupidity um and by attitude um so that's a little um glimmer of the kinds of things that I'm wrestling with um in this book there's many more but I'd be happy to answer any questions that how many of you [Applause] have I hate that you didn't mention the Beatles one I really like that one 4,000 hours I I don't know if you mention people who are over 40 or 50 can't spend 10,000 hours doing something what do you suggest to us to become outliers oh this is a the question is in reference to I talk in the book at one point about um how long it take to be good at something and this observation by many psychologists that um that uh to master a cognitively complex task whether it's playing chess at an elite level or being a brain surgeon or a classical music composer or a good computer programmer
太强大、太内在、太根深蒂固，我们无能为力。我认为“兑现”这个论点让我们有了能力、有了力量，它告诉我们：只要我们愿意去关注贫穷、愚蠢和态度所造成的约束，我们其实可以在“人最终能成为什么样”这件事上带来深刻的改变。以上就是我在这本书里正在琢磨的一些东西的一点小小的呈现，还有很多，但我很乐意回答任何问题……你们当中有多少人……（掌声）——我很不满你没提披头士那个例子，我特别喜欢那个，四千小时。我不知道你有没有提到，四五十岁以上的人已经没法花一万小时去做某件事了，你建议我们这些人怎么才能成为“异类”？哦，这个问题是针对我书里某处讲到的：要在某件事上做到很好需要多长时间，以及许多心理学家的一个观察——要精通一项认知上复杂的任务，无论是下棋下到顶尖水平，还是当脑外科医生、古典音乐作曲家，或者一个优秀的程序员，
30:44
um requires seemingly without exception uh 10,000 hours of deliberate practice uh so 10,000 hours is roughly 4 hours a day for 10 years so you need to put in that kind of time um before even the most talented of people innately talented of people can ever achieve an elite status um but I would actually the and uh what I don't think this argument that observation suggests that people who are older in life that this is closing doors to people who are older in life on the contrary I says I think it suggests the opposite that it says that at any point in our lives if we are in a position to apply ourselves in a formal and rigorous and intensive way to a problem we should be able to see fruits of that it says in other words that what is special about um uh people who do highly extraordinary or creative acts is not that they are um there's something special of something inherent in their minds some particular genius or that there is some magical property associated with youth right on the contrary it says that no what sets them apart is that simply that what we are seeing is the um the the necessary and predictable outcome of applying oneself um rigorously to a task something that can that is available to
似乎无一例外都需要一万小时的刻意练习。一万小时大致相当于每天四小时、坚持十年。所以你必须投入这样的时间，哪怕是天赋最高的人，也要先投入这些时间，才可能达到顶尖水平。但我其实觉得——我并不认为这个论点、这个观察意味着人生走到后半程的人门就关上了；恰恰相反，我认为它说明的是反面：在我们人生的任何阶段，只要我们能够以系统、严格、集中的方式去投入某个领域，我们就应该能看到成果。换句话说，它说明那些做出非凡成就或极具创造性成果的人，其特别之处并不在于他们脑子里有什么天生的东西、什么特殊的天才，也不在于年轻本身有什么魔力。恰恰相反，它说明让他们与众不同的，只不过是我们所看到的那种严格投入一项任务之后必然、可预期的结果——而这件事，是
32:03
anyone at any point in their life if they choose to um apply themselves in that way so it's I think it's a a liberating um observation sure so uh L League Baseball has a cut of date uh May 1st and uh I wonder what is the best mitigation strategy for a boy who wants to play ke ball and is born on April 37 yeah um so the question was about little leag baseball little leag baseball has a cut off in Midsummer or early summer and in fact if you look at the distribution of birth dates of uh uh baseball players professional baseball players in in America you will see that they are highly clustered in the late summer months uh Most baseball players are June July August or July August September I've forgotten exactly where the um so we see this same effect very clearly with baseball what does the kid who was born on on April 27th uh do well uh in a certain way nothing um there's nothing you can do this is I mean this is um one of the things that I that I in writing this book was objecting to was this strain in American thinking that says that all obstacles are ultimately um um uh overcomable um by individuals if that individual simply chooses to um be determined enough I think that's very true and I Persistence of determination are incredibly important um components
任何人在人生的任何时刻，只要愿意那样去投入，都可以做到的。所以我觉得这是一个很解放人的观察。——好的，少年棒球联盟的截止日期是 5 月 1 日，我想问，一个想打棒球、却出生在 4 月 27 日的男孩，最好的应对策略是什么？嗯，这个问题是关于少年棒球联盟的。少棒的年龄截止日期在仲夏或初夏，事实上如果你看美国职业棒球运动员的出生日期分布，你会发现他们高度集中在夏末的那几个月，大多数棒球运动员是六七八月出生，或者七八九月，我记不清具体是哪几个月了。所以在棒球上我们也非常清楚地看到了同样的效应。那一个 4 月 27 日出生的孩子该怎么办呢？某种意义上说，没什么可做的。这其实正是我写这本书时想要反驳的一点：美国人思维里有一种倾向，认为只要个人足够有决心，一切障碍最终都是可以克服的。我觉得坚持和决心确实非常重要，是极其重要的组成部分。
33:28
of of success but we also have to understand that when it comes to stupidity constraints there is very little that individuals can do that's the reason that's why we call them stupidity constraints because they have been stupidly oo imposed on a collective level and are powerful enough to um overcome even really really determined um individuals there are certain things that can only be done at the society level right and you know it is only our naive I said only our naive faith in the efficiency and fairness of mocra systems that prevents us from seeing this the only thing you can do for the Kid born April 27th Who Wants To Be A baseball player is do what I talked about is create parallel leagues based on on physical maturity that's the way you do it um and it is a if you look when I read that roster list for those Czech teams you know there are lots and lots and lots of kids in Czech in in the Czech Republic who want to be um successful um uh soccer or hockey players um but who happen to be born at the end of the year and you can see there's the evidence they're not getting it they're not making it right it's not enough to ask the individual to um to try harder sure back yeah so um I was kind of wondering as I read through the book
……关于成功。但我们也必须明白，说到那些愚蠢的限制条件，个人几乎是无能为力的。这正是我们把它们叫做'愚蠢的限制'的原因——因为它们是在集体层面上被愚蠢地强加下来的，而且强大到连非常非常有决心的个人都无法克服。有些事情只能在社会层面上去做，对吧。而且，正是我们对精英选拔体制的效率和公平抱有的那种天真信念，让我们看不到这一点。对于那个4月27日出生、想当棒球运动员的孩子，你唯一能做的就是我刚才讲的：按身体发育成熟度设立平行的联赛，就该这么办。而且你看，我念那些捷克球队的名单时——捷克有非常非常多的孩子想成为出色的足球或冰球运动员，但他们碰巧生在年末。证据摆在那儿：他们没能出头，没能成功。所以光是要求个人再努力一点，是不够的。当然。好，后面那位。嗯，我读这本书的时候一直在想……
08劣势即优势：阅读障碍与大班教学
34:48
if uh you know given that it's kind of about constraints placed uh somewhat arbitrarily and if you came across any examples in your research of sort of out of those theories in other words people that manage to succeed at certain things despite those constraints yeah so this is a very interesting question so this is something I thought about a lot subsequent to this um so the book identifies I'm really interested in this book in advantages that are advantages meaning the kinds of opportunities and advantages that end up putting you further ahead than you would have been otherwise right but that's clearly only one of four conditions there are also advantages that are disadvantages so if your father is worth a billion dollars do you think that you would be uh as a kid uh better off or worse off today right than you than you would be if your father made $100,000 I would rather have a dad who made H 100,000 than have than a billion right I think that having a father with a billion dollars would actually be quite quite crippling to your motivation and so that's an advantage that's actually a disadvantage right so then there's also disadvantages that are disadvantages so uh that would be that's condition three and that would be to grow up the child of a single mother
……你知道，考虑到这本书讲的多少是那些被随意强加的限制条件，那你在研究中有没有碰到过一些反例？换句话说，就是有些人尽管有这些限制，还是在某些事情上成功了。对，这是个非常有意思的问题，也是我后来想了很多的事。这本书关注的是'优势中的优势'，也就是那些让你比原本更领先一步的机会和优势，对吧。但这显然只是四种情况之一。还有一种是'看似优势、其实是劣势'。比如说，如果你父亲身家十亿美元，你觉得作为一个孩子，你今天的处境会比父亲年薪十万美元的情况更好还是更糟？我宁愿要一个年薪十万的爸爸，也不要一个身家十亿的。我觉得有个身家十亿的父亲，其实会严重削弱你的动力。所以那是一种其实是劣势的优势。然后还有'劣势就是劣势'，那是第三种情况，比如说，你是单亲妈妈的孩子……
36:12
who's addicted to drugs in uh in a uh in East Memphis is a disadvantage that's a disadvantage you really you know almost no one overcomes that right but what you're asking about is the fourth condition which is are there disadvantages that are advantages now that is the most fascinating one of all so um uh for example one of the uh most uh fascinating observations that's been made in recent years is that uh someone did a study recently that pointed out that 30% of American entrepreneurs uh have been diagnosed at some point in their life with a profound learning disability and you know you only have to the list of people who fall into this category so the dyslexics you know Branson's a dyslexic Charles Schwab is a dyslexic the guy who founded um Kingo is a dyslexic uh I can go on I mean the list is like this long right so why is that well the argument is that it's not a CO instance is in fact um it is a direct function their entrepreneurialism is a direct function of their disability so how do you succeed if you cannot read or write from the the very earliest stages in your Elementary education you compensate for that if you're the ones who make it a lot of kids don't make it but those who do compensate how do they compensate
……妈妈还吸毒，在东孟菲斯长大，这就是不折不扣的劣势，几乎没有人能从中翻身。但你问的是第四种情况：有没有'劣势其实是优势'的？那才是最迷人的一种。举个例子，近些年最有意思的观察之一是：最近有项研究指出，30%的美国创业者在人生的某个阶段被诊断出有严重的学习障碍。你只要看看属于这一类的人名单——那些阅读障碍者：布兰森有阅读障碍，查尔斯·施瓦布有阅读障碍，创办金考（Kinko's）的那位也有阅读障碍，我还能一直说下去，名单有这么长。为什么会这样？有一种说法是，这不是巧合，事实上他们的创业才能正是其障碍的直接产物。那么，如果你从小学最早期就不会读写，你怎么可能成功？你得去补偿。那些成功的人——很多孩子确实没能挺过来——但挺过来的人靠的就是补偿。他们是怎么补偿的呢？
37:31
well from the very earliest age you learn how to delegate so kids who make it through school kids who make it through school who can't read or write you know how they do it they do it by having others do their read reading and writing for them right you learn you compensate by being a really good oral Communicator you can't write or read so you you're a talker right you learn how to Pro solve right cuz your life is one big problem you're in an institution asks you to do two things and you can't do either of them right and you learn how to be a leader you have to do all those things problem solve delegate um oral communicate you learn how to lead in fact there's a beautiful study that was also done that said that pointed out that of dyslexic entrepreneurs 80% of them were a captain of a high school sports team versus 30% of non-dyslexic entrepreneurs that's the character type right so when you get into the real world and what is it required of an entrepreneur that they be a good leader that they delegate that they be an a problem solver and that they be good oral communicators these people have been spending their whole life practicing the very the four skills that are at the Cornerstone of entrepreneurial success now if you talk
从很小的年纪起，你就学会了怎么把事情委派出去。那些不会读写却能一路读完学校的孩子，你知道他们是怎么做到的吗？他们让别人替他们读、替他们写。你还会通过成为一个特别好的口头沟通者来补偿——你不会读写，所以你成了一个会说的人。你学会解决问题，因为你的人生就是一个大问题：学校要求你做两件事，而这两件你都做不了。你还学会当领导者。这些你都得做到：解决问题、委派、口头表达，你学会了领导。事实上还有一项很漂亮的研究指出，有阅读障碍的创业者中，80%当过高中运动队的队长，而没有阅读障碍的创业者中只有30%。这就是那种性格类型。所以当你进入现实世界，创业者需要具备什么？要是个好的领导者，会委派，会解决问题，口头表达能力强。而这些人一辈子都在练习创业成功最核心的这四项技能。这时候如果你去问……
38:47
to those people and you ask John Chambers dyslexic right can has difficulty reading his own email right you ask all those guys um what did you know what role did dyslexia play in your success they would say it wasn't an obstacle that I had to overcome it was it is in fact the reason I'm successful it is a disadvantage that ended up being an advantage now I am actually this category to me is the most fascinating one of all um so let me give you another example um one of the most striking findings in educational research is that there's almost no payoff that we can find to reducing class size even though all parents are obsessed with class size right irrationally so if your kid is in a class size of 25 and you hear that at some other school it's 19 and so you pay $25,000 a year to get your kid into the school with the 19 kids instead of the 25 right in fact Reams and Reams and reams of academic Studies have failed to show any advantage to smaller class sizes except for uh really disadvantaged kids in very very early grades for everyone else it's a total wash why is it a wash because it makes no sense why would you do just as well in a class where the teacher's not paying you enough as much attention right shouldn't
……去问这些人，你去问约翰·钱伯斯，他有阅读障碍，连读自己的邮件都很费劲。你去问所有这些人：阅读障碍在你的成功中起了什么作用？他们会说，那不是我必须克服的障碍，事实上那正是我成功的原因。这是一种最终变成优势的劣势。对我来说，这一类是所有情况里最迷人的。我再举个例子。教育研究中最惊人的发现之一是：我们几乎找不到缩小班级规模能带来什么回报，尽管所有家长都对班级规模痴迷不已，而且痴迷得毫无道理。如果你的孩子在一个25人的班里，你听说另一所学校一个班19人，于是你一年花两万五千美元，把孩子送进那所19人的学校，而不是25人的。可事实上，堆积如山的学术研究都没能证明小班有任何优势——除了对处境非常不利的孩子在非常低的年级里有效。对其他所有人来说，完全没有差别。为什么没差别？因为这说不通啊。为什么在一个老师没法给你那么多关注的班里，你的表现会一样好？难道不该……
40:04
shouldn't there be a correlation between teacher inputs and student performance uh yes but only if there are there is no such thing as a disadvantage that can be an advantage what if the disadvantage of being in a large classroom is something that you compensate for what if it's like dyslexia what if if you're one of 30 kids you compensate and learn self-reliance and that self-reliance in the end is just an important a trait as the thing that you would get from a heavy amount of teacher feedback right we are resolutely uninterested in the category of benefits that fall into that fourth category right we can't even talk about them no one wants to talk about what are the things what are the kind of um customized disadvantages that we might introduce into our school system that might have uh a positive effect right and we're we're all we operate under this extraordinarily psychologically naive notion that the only thing that matters in school are advantages that are advantages right as if everything else didn't exist like I would love to see for example I'm now ranting on on on but um it is not like I I live in Manhattan in Manhattan we have these super super super fancy private schools the most advantaged private schools in the world
……难道教师的投入和学生的表现之间不该有相关性吗？是该有，但前提是根本不存在'劣势可以变成优势'这回事。那如果说，身处大班这个劣势是你会去补偿的呢？如果它就像阅读障碍一样呢？如果你是30个孩子中的一个，你会去补偿，学会自立，而这种自立最终和你从大量老师反馈中得到的东西一样重要呢？我们对属于第四类的那些好处坚决地不感兴趣，我们甚至都没法去谈它。没人愿意讨论：我们可以在学校体系里引入哪些'量身定制的劣势'，从而产生正面的效果。我们都在一种心理学上极其幼稚的观念下运作，好像学校里唯一重要的就是'优势中的优势'，好像其他一切都不存在。比如说，我很想看到——我现在有点滔滔不绝了——我住在曼哈顿，曼哈顿有那种超级超级超级高档的私立学校，是全世界条件最优越的私立学校……
41:22
right that cost 30 grand a year um high schools um I'm not convinced that that isn't a that those schools don't fall into the category of advantages that are disadvantages I would love to see I would love to know on a kind of see a systematic analysis of whether you're helped why is it the case that you're better off going to that school than learning how to cope in a far more um heterogeneous um Rough and Tumble um uh Public School environment I don't it's not it's not obvious to me why that's in fact most of the successful people who send their kids to those schools when went to Rough and Tumble heterogeneous Public Schools so it is this massive Act of cognitive dissonance that you turn on the very thing that clearly made you successful and deny it to your child right in the name of what right the same grandfather who says that he walked seven miles to school every morning Barefoot drives his kid his grandchild in the SUV two blocks to school cuz it's raining out if it worked for you Grandpa why doesn't it work for me if you at other um possible cultural explanations for Success like you prepar to Asian to Western but even within Western there's of I read a lot of studies that try to explain for example if it's genetic or cultural that you know there are more Nobel prizes among
……一年学费三万美元的高中。我并不确信那些学校不属于'其实是劣势的优势'这一类。我很想看到一份系统的分析：为什么上那种学校，会比在一个多元得多、更粗粝混杂的公立学校环境里学会应对更好？在我看来这一点并不显而易见。事实上，把孩子送进那些学校的成功人士，大多数自己上的都是粗粝混杂、成分多元的公立学校。所以这是一种巨大的认知失调：你背弃了那个显然造就了你成功的东西，还不让自己的孩子接触它，以什么名义呢？就像那个说自己当年每天早上光着脚走七英里去上学的爷爷，因为外面下雨，就开着SUV把孙子送两条街去学校。爷爷，既然那招对你管用，为什么对我就不管用呢？——你有没有考虑过其他可能解释成功的文化因素？比如你把亚洲和西方作对比，但即使在西方内部……我读过很多研究试图解释，比如说，究竟是基因还是文化，使得诺贝尔奖得主中有更多是……
09局外人的中间人角色与少数族群
42:43
Jews or you Western European Eastern European Jews and is there any way to debunk that per se yeah there uh so um a lot of advantages um Jewish advantages are shared by other ethnic groups who have are in a similar sociological position so the parses in India uh the Lebanese throughout the world um the uh ethnic Chinese in Southeast Asia in Malaysia and Vietnam and um and I mean I could go on but there's a whole series of groups that if you look closely at their um the roles they have played and the success they have achieved uh it's so they're all they're all doing the same thing so Jews are not anomalous they're not anomalous at all they are part of a pattern of accomplishment that is common to this these discreet um ethnic minorities within larger countries and a lot of that has to do with the kind of extraordinary set of um there are a series of disadvantages that come with being in that position but there are also a set of advantages um so Outsider status um being this kind of minority Outsider group is incredibly useful if you would like to play any sort of middle man role right um which
……犹太人，或者说西欧、东欧的犹太人？有没有办法把这种说法驳倒？有的。很多所谓的犹太人优势，其实是和处在类似社会位置的其他族群共有的。比如印度的帕西人、散布世界各地的黎巴嫩人，还有东南亚——马来西亚、越南——的华人，我还能继续举下去。有一整批这样的群体，如果你仔细看他们扮演的角色和取得的成就，你会发现他们做的其实是同一件事。所以犹太人并不反常，一点也不反常，他们属于某种成就模式的一部分，这种模式在这些散布于大国之内的特定少数族群中很常见。而这里面有很大一部分和一整套非同寻常的处境有关——处在那个位置上会带来一系列劣势，但同时也带来一系列优势。比如'局外人'身份：身为这种少数族裔的局外群体，如果你想扮演任何中间人的角色，那是极其有用的……
43:59
what all those groups do Lebanese uh Pary um ethnic Chinese and uh and and Jews always play invariably end up playing this entrepreneurial middleman role which is something that is uniquely available to The Outsider because the outsider um as an outsider is allowed to do things that you can't do if you're a member of a majority you can be tough you can say no if you're gonna be a banker right where you're where you're I mean this does not apply to the bankers on Wall Street over the last 10 years but historically if you were a banker your success depended on your ability to say no right and to be mean to say to someone who is not paying you got to pay right it's really hard to do that if you are a member of the majority culture because you risk your social standing when you stand up to someone and put your foot down but if you're a member of a minority group that's outside the general culture you can be tough you can say no right so that's why you see banking is always dominated by those four groups throughout the you know my my mother group up in Jamaica uh the Jamaican it's funny actually Jamaica is a perfect example of this the entrepreneurial commercial class of Jamaica is ethnic Chinese Jewish um and Lebanese right it's it's like an exact
……而这正是所有那些群体在做的事。黎巴嫩人、帕西人、华人、犹太人，最后总是无一例外地扮演这种创业型的中间人角色，而这是局外人才独有的机会。因为局外人可以做一些身为多数群体成员就做不了的事：你可以强硬，可以说'不'。如果你要当银行家——当然过去十年华尔街那些银行家不适用这条——但从历史上看，如果你是银行家，你的成功取决于你说'不'的能力，取决于你能不能狠下心对一个没还钱的人说：你必须还钱。如果你是主流文化的一员，这很难做到，因为你跟人对着干、寸步不让的时候，是拿自己的社会地位在冒险。但如果你属于主流文化之外的少数群体，你就可以强硬，可以说'不'。所以你会看到，银行业历来都由那四个群体主导。我母亲在牙买加长大——其实挺有意思的，牙买加正是这件事的完美例子：牙买加的创业和商业阶层就是华人、犹太人和黎巴嫩人。这简直是一个精准的……
45:17
um uh uh um indication of this very thing so we could play with that idea and um and I and and come to an understanding of all kind of of patterns of accomplishment in those groups because all those groups also have disproportionate professional success and disproportionate intellectual to some extent disproportionate intellectual success as well um feel like I'm discriminating against the back of the room uh referring to the 10,000 hour idea what in your opinion what is it um how difficult is it to be successful in today's time period where we're at right now as opposed to the Great Depression as opposed to maybe the great impression recession uh well that's an interesting question I mean the um I think it's easier in the sense that there are just so many other there are so many um uh such an array of things to be good at now right um success was narrowly defined in the 30s as being a doctor or a lawyer um today we have you know 25 different things that we would would give Accord that same status to um or at least after the uh melt done on Wall Street 24 um uh sorry I can't resist the Wall Street dicks um uh so in that sense you know if you think about um uh the kinds of things that are available to those who are willing to put 10,000 hours of
……印证。所以我们可以顺着这个思路推演，去理解这些群体中各种各样的成就模式，因为所有这些群体在专业领域的成功也都高得不成比例，在智识方面某种程度上也高得不成比例。我觉得我有点冷落后排的听众了。关于一万小时的说法，你觉得——在我们现在所处的这个时代，跟大萧条时期相比，或者跟那次大衰退相比，要取得成功有多难？嗯，这是个有意思的问题。我觉得从某种意义上说更容易了，因为现在可以擅长的领域实在太多、种类太丰富了。在三十年代，成功的定义很窄，就是当医生或者律师；而今天我们有二十五种不同的事情能被赋予同等的地位——或者说，在华尔街崩盘之后，是二十四种。抱歉，我实在忍不住要挖苦华尔街。所以从这个意义上说，你想想那些愿意投入一万小时练习的人可以选择的方向……
46:48
practice in the list is just longer now and so in that sense I would say that we're um at an advantage but in referring to you know how Bill Gates you know work towards his achievement and you know 3:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. at UB programming and that seeing that success before it actually became what we're all here doing now oh I see well there's always going to be yeah well we're in this and that that kind of question is unanswerable because it requires us to know what the next you know the thing about people of Bill Gates's generation was that they were um getting their $10,000 hours in in a discipline before the rest of the world realized that was the discipline that mattered right by definition we do not know what that discipline is today only the 15-year-old equivalent of Bill Gates does so those of you with 15-year-old children should ask them but you know I'm not going to know sure the the culture of Honor harling Kentucky a little bit I found that really fascinating yeah so I have a in the culture section of the book I um I I talk about I try to cond I talk about um I'm trying to sort of um it's a I'm trying to set up the discussion of Asians in math because the hard thing to understand about the kind of cultural explanation I give for Asian
……这份清单现在确实更长了。从这个角度说，我认为我们是占优势的。但说到比尔·盖茨是怎么朝着他的成就努力的，凌晨三点到六点在大学里编程，而且是在这件事变成我们今天大家都在做的事情之前，他就看到了那个前景……哦我明白了。这个嘛，总会有……对，我们正身处其中。这类问题其实是无法回答的，因为它要求我们知道下一个会是什么。比尔·盖茨那一代人的特点是：在世界上其他人还没意识到某个领域重要之前，他们就已经在那个领域完成了一万小时。按定义来说，我们今天并不知道那个领域是什么，只有相当于15岁的比尔·盖茨才知道。所以家里有15岁孩子的，可以去问问他们，但我肯定是不知道的。当然。肯塔基州哈伦县的荣誉文化那一段，我觉得特别有意思。对，在书里讲文化的那部分，我……我试着把它浓缩……我想铺垫的是关于亚洲人和数学的讨论，因为我给出的那种文化解释里，最难理解的一点就是……
48:10
mathematics superiority is this notion that the kids who are doing well in math today in South Korea or Singapore or where have you Japan are not themselves rice Farmers nor their parents nor in some cases are their grandparents right so why how is it possible that Rice farming could be the explanation for the way they are well in order to buy that you have to buy the idea that cultural um models and codes and rules persist that long after the circumstances that created them have gone away those things are still in the air and they don't they don't they don't um Peter out or vanish they're actually they stick around and so I I describe I give an account an explanation for why Appalachia in America has always been um the most violent part of the United States um and the explanation for that is not in the particular immediate conditions of Appalachian life it has to do with where the ancestors of those living in Appalachia come from um and they all they many of them they that that Appalachia was settled by people by the Scotch Irish people from the Borderlands of the United Kingdom um who had developed in their time their hundreds of years there in that most kind of um Lawless and um dangerous and um uh uh um
……亚洲人数学优势的解释：今天在韩国、新加坡，或者日本，数学学得好的那些孩子，他们本人不是稻农，他们的父母也不是，有些情况下连祖父母都不是。那怎么可能用种水稻来解释他们现在的样子呢？要接受这一点，你就得先接受这样一个观念：文化的模式、准则和规则，会在造就它们的环境早已消失之后，仍然长久地留存下来。那些东西还飘在空气里，它们不会慢慢消散，也不会消失，它们其实会一直留着。所以我在书里描述并解释了，为什么美国的阿巴拉契亚地区一直是全美最暴力的地方。而这个解释并不在于阿巴拉契亚当下的具体生活条件，而在于住在那里的人的祖先来自哪里。阿巴拉契亚是由苏格兰-爱尔兰人开拓定居的，他们来自英国的边境地带。在那里的几百年间，在那种最无法无天、最危险、最……
49:34
um Barren um existence had developed this thing called a culture of Honor which was a culture where your where your honor was everything and where you would do anything to defend it and that is precisely the kind of culture that leads to lots and lots and lots of violence um but it was a that whole section of the book is is preparing us for the notion for the seemingly counter intuitive notion that what your great great great great grandparents did for a living can make a difference in how you see the world um which is not an obvious it's a difficult point I think for many people um to grasp sure uh you made a great case for the uh 10,000 hours of work it takes to become exceptionally good and at something and then also for um the people that are basically at a disadvantage but I'm wondering about where you have the loss to society where you only have so many slots so for if you had a better pathway for the che team so that the people were equally distributed would they have a better team yeah I think it stands to reason that the checks so suppose the cchs have or the can let's use the Canadians since I Canadian um suppose the Canadians did had three parallel leagues um then their denominator of kids that they're choosing from I think if you look at the
……最贫瘠的生存环境中，他们发展出了一种叫做'荣誉文化'的东西——在那种文化里，你的荣誉就是一切，你会不惜一切代价去捍卫它，而这恰恰是那种会导致大量暴力的文化。但书里那一整个部分，是在为一个看似违反直觉的观念做铺垫：你的曾曾曾祖父母以什么为生，会影响你如何看待这个世界。这不是一个显而易见的道理，我想对很多人来说，这是个不容易把握的点。当然。你很有力地论证了要在某件事上做到出类拔萃需要一万小时的努力，也论证了那些基本上处于劣势的人的情况。但我想问的是社会层面的损失：名额就那么多。所以，如果捷克队有一条更好的选拔通道，让人员分布更均匀，他们的球队会不会更好？对，我觉得按理说捷克队会……假设捷克人，或者说加拿大人——我就用加拿大人吧，因为我是加拿大人——假设加拿大设立了三个平行的联赛，那么他们可以从中挑选球员的孩子基数……我想，如果你去看……
50:54
distribution now you can make a a reasonable that they are the cap rate is 40% right if we can raise the capitalization rate to 80% we have doubled the number the available pool of kids that we're choosing from for the most elite level so it doesn't change the same number of people um uh are there's only a limited number of slots in the National Hockey League but it stands to reason if the pool that you're pulling from is twice as big um the average level of talent should be higher um uh uh that you should in other words be able to to raise the median level of talent in the league if you've increased your um if you've increased your uh the pool you're you're you're you're fishing in follow okay okay I know I'm about to get like totally smoked but go ahead so so then uh you would expect that the people that were born later in the year on the cck team or on all these teams would possibly better than the ones that are born earlier yeah uh that's yes here's where it starts to get really really interesting you might so they have overcome well there are several things there remember um or they
分布——现在你可以做一个合理的假设，就是他们的资本化率是40%，对吧。如果我们能把资本化率提高到80%，那我们就把可供挑选、进入最顶尖层次的孩子的人才池扩大了一倍。所以人数本身没变，呃，国家冰球联盟的位置就那么多，是有限的。但按理说，如果你捞人的池子大了一倍，呃，平均天赋水平就应该更高，呃，换句话说，你应该能把联盟里天赋的中位数水平抬上去——只要你扩大了、呃，只要你扩大了你捕鱼的那个池子。跟得上吗？好，好，我知道我接下来可能要被彻底怼了，不过你说吧。那么，呃，你就会预期，在那支CCK球队、或者在所有这些球队里，那些出生在年份靠后月份的人，可能会比出生在年初的人更强？对，呃，是的，从这里开始就变得非常非常有意思了。你可能——所以他们是克服了……嗯，这里面有好几个因素，记住，呃，或者他们
52:07
may Simply Be maturational anomalies that is to say um not all if you look at a group of seveny olds um uh they don't all mature at the same uh rate it is mostly the case that the kids born in January are going to be bigger and stronger than the kids born in December but some of the December borns at the age of 10 or 11 are going to be as mature as those born in January I think what you're seeing is that um those are the kids who end up making the NHL they're just ones whose whose growth curve was a little bit accelerated um I think that's the um although don't know it's a very good question it would be worth looking into but I did look at the list of like the greatest hockey players ever and you know they're almost all January February March so does it play into the the you know the the ability the C operate the ability to take advantage of like you were talking about the East African Runners and the million they have there but their system is not able to do anything with that know so yes the quality of of the the the ones who make it through there's a great conversation that's happening here AC Microsoft around Innovation and part one of the ideas is you know how do we dig in and find Innovation where it is it's it's not always just coming out of MSR
可能只是发育上的异常个例。也就是说，呃，如果你看一群七岁的孩子，呃，他们并不是所有人都以同样的速度发育。大多数情况下，一月份出生的孩子会比十二月份出生的孩子更高更壮，但有些十二月出生的孩子，到十岁或十一岁的时候，发育程度会和一月出生的孩子一样。我觉得你看到的现象是，呃，那些孩子就是最后打进NHL的人，他们只是生长曲线稍微提前了一点。呃，我觉得那就是——虽然我也不确定，这是个非常好的问题，值得深入研究。但我确实查过史上最伟大的冰球运动员名单，你知道，他们几乎全是一月、二月、三月出生的。那这会不会关系到，呃，你知道的，那种能力、那种资本化的能力、把它利用起来的能力——就像你刚才说的东非长跑运动员，他们那边有上百万人，但他们的体系没办法把这些人用起来？是的，所以是的，成功闯出来的那些人的质量……在这里，微软内部正在进行一场很棒的讨论，是关于创新的。其中一个想法是，你知道，我们怎么去挖掘、去发现创新真正发生的地方——它并不总是只从MSR（微软研究院）里出来，
10提高兑现率：制度设计的思想实验
53:22
there might be we're bad at finding ideas great innovation in other parts of the company somebody that's in operations or support has a great idea but if there's not the mechanisms to pull that out and do something with that and so we're there's this downward pressure on the stupidity factor of of not allowing us to find those ideas as well as the upward push in trying to to share those yeah so this is a good point so um to go back to your point as well so one way imagine you know it's as a thought experiment let's just use hockey for example suppose we wanted to increase the cap rate um in hockey in in Canada um one way to do it is to talk do what I'm talking about which is not to increase the number of slots in the National Hockey League but simply to increase the number of Developmental leagues to have this kind of but another way is to is to increase the slots suppose as a thought experiment we double the size of um the National Hockey League and we say we're we're now going to have 30 teams right would that be would the would the expansion of that end have the effect of forcing um a higher e a greater efficiency in the capitalization of hockey teams in um uh of of of of hockey in the developmental leagues in other words can we are two ways to do this can you do this bottom
也可能……我们不擅长发现好点子。公司其他部门也有很棒的创新，运营或者支持部门的某个人有个好主意，但如果没有相应的机制把它挖出来、把它做成点什么。所以我们这边既有一种向下的压力，就是那种因为找不到这些点子而产生的『愚蠢因素』，同时也有一种向上的推力，想把这些东西分享出去。对，这说得很好。所以，呃，回到你刚才那个点上，有一种办法是——你想象一下，做个思想实验，就还拿冰球举例。假设我们想提高加拿大冰球的资本化率，呃，一种办法就是照我刚才说的那样做，不是增加国家冰球联盟里的名额，而只是增加青训联赛的数量，搞这种模式。但另一种办法是增加名额。假设作为思想实验，我们把国家冰球联盟的规模扩大一倍，我们说现在要有30支球队，对吧。那这种顶端的扩张，会不会产生一种效果，逼着青训联赛在冰球人才的资本化上做得更高效？换句话说，我们能不能——有两种办法——你是从下往上做，
54:43
up or can you do this um uh top down the only um I would be curious I'm curious about the top down version because we have a version of it in this country right now right where you have um uh companies like Microsoft which um a whole tier of high technology companies which are in Perpetual have a Perpetual shortage of very very talented people right they're always complaining we can't we can't find enough people who to fill these kinds of slots we got to go overseas we got to all this kind of um and so in this case it has not had the um this this Perpetual shortage of very talented people has not really had the effect I think of dramatically raising our capitalization rates when it comes to math and science in fact over the course of the last 25 or 30 years the relative performance of the United States in math and science seems to if I if I have my numbers correctly seems to have if anything eroded um so that suggests that maybe uh top down that that um that supply side or demand side approaches I always get the mixed up one of them you know what I'm talking about increasing number of slots at the top may not be the best um way to do it although I don't I mean but it's open to it's it's worth you know think about all
还是从上往下做？呃，我唯一……我会很好奇，我对『自上而下』那个版本很好奇，因为我们国家现在就有一个这样的版本，对吧。你看，呃，像微软这样的公司，还有一整个层级的高科技公司，它们长期处在一种极度缺乏顶尖人才的状态，对吧。它们老是抱怨说我们找不到足够的人来填这些岗位，我们得去海外招人，我们得怎样怎样。所以在这个案例里，这种长期的顶尖人才短缺，我认为并没有真正起到大幅提高我们在数学和科学方面资本化率的作用。事实上，在过去二十五到三十年里，如果我的数据没记错的话，美国在数学和科学上的相对表现，如果说有变化的话，似乎是在退步。呃，所以这就说明，也许自上而下的、呃，那种供给侧或者需求侧的做法——我老是把这两个搞混，反正你知道我说的是什么，就是增加顶端的名额——可能并不是最好的办法。虽然我不……我是说，这还是开放的，值得去想想所有
55:56
these various um scenarios sure so do you think when companies invest in communities by having math programs and all this that a lot of that effort's going to be wasted because the societal underpinnings aren't there like you described yeah yeah you need to have a kind of I mean there has to be like to go back to the the the Kenyon Runners for example so they do have um there's an awful lot of it's actually incredibly wasteful to have a 90% capitalization rate for distance running you don't actually want a million of your 12-year-olds running um 10 miles a day because you only have four spots on the Olympic team or whatever three spots Olympic team you want them to be doing something that has some kind of ultimate payoff so it's actually that's actually not a it's not a model we want to emulate it's probably a good thing that we have a 1% capitalization rate but we just shouldn't whine about our performance in running but as a result but um uh uh but there are a whole series of of like here's a this is a totally wacky idea that I've been talking about with some people which is um uh suppose you uh rewarded in suppose you set up a system that allowed individuals or groups or nonprofits to profit from Raising cap rates so I go
这些不同的情形。当然。那你觉得，当企业投资社区、办数学项目之类的时候，其中很多努力会不会白费，因为你说的那种社会层面的支撑并不存在？对，对，你需要有一种……我是说，必须要有——还是拿肯尼亚长跑运动员来举例吧。他们确实有很多……其实，长跑有90%的资本化率是极其浪费的。你其实并不希望你国家一百万个十二岁孩子每天跑十英里，因为你在奥运代表队里只有四个名额，或者说三个名额。你希望他们去做一些最终能有回报的事情。所以这其实不是我们该效仿的模式。我们的资本化率只有1%，这可能反而是件好事，只是我们不该因此抱怨自己在长跑上的成绩。但是，呃，还有一整套……这里有一个我一直在跟一些人聊的完全异想天开的想法，就是，呃，假设你去奖励……假设你建立一套制度，让个人、团体或者非营利组织能从『提高资本化率』中获利。比如我去
57:13
into suppose I go into the to South Central LA and I have a class of first grade class right now I know actuar speaking looking at the those kids in their socio economic background that the amount of federal tax those kids will pay like uh actuar 20 30 years hence is probably close to zero right you have to join you have to really be a member of the middle class to to pay taxes these days and the the number of kids in a the worst part of South Central who end up in the middle class is very very small so suppose I said to so the cap rate if we Define capitalization as joining the middle class and paying federal taxes the capitalization rate in a bad neighborhood in South Central is pretty much zero okay so what if we said to anyone that if you um can raise the capitalization rate in that group I'll give you a cut of their federal taxes so what if you said just like you it's like a you could you could Venture Capital um groups of kids right no I'm just doing this as a as a kind of as a kind of thought experiment so we know we're getting so why do you because we're getting zero fedal tax dollars now what would be so wrong to say if you Joe Smith want to invest in this class of kids for the next 25 years I'll give you
……假设我去了洛杉矶南部中心区，我面前有一个一年级的班级。现在我知道，从精算的角度看这些孩子和他们的社会经济背景，这些孩子在二三十年后要交的联邦税，精算下来大概接近于零，对吧。如今你得进入中产阶级、真正成为中产的一员，才谈得上交税。而南部中心区最糟糕的那一片，最终能进入中产阶级的孩子非常非常少。所以假设我说……如果我们把『资本化』定义为进入中产阶级并缴纳联邦税，那么南部中心区一个糟糕社区的资本化率基本上是零。好，那如果我们对所有人说：如果你能提高那群孩子的资本化率，我就把他们缴的联邦税分你一部分呢？就好比说，你可以像风险投资一样『投资』一群孩子，对吧。不不，我只是把这当成一种思想实验。所以我们现在从他们身上收到的联邦税是零。那么这样说又有什么不对：如果你，张三，愿意在未来25年里投资这个班的孩子，我就给你
58:35
50% of their tax revenue in perpetuity and if you so in other words if you can get you know three computer programmers and two doctors out of this class of 30 kids you're going to be a very very rich man and by the way Society will be way better and the kids will be happier because they will have what they don't have now which is someone who is actively interested in and capable of of increasing their capitalization right of getting the rate from zero to whatever it is 10 15 20 35% I see I I have no there's all people you know when you tell idea to people they very often people think oh that it just sounds so you know what it's whatever problems are that idea it's a lot better than what we have now which is no one caring for the kids right but the point is that capitalization strategies um change the discussion they move us away from this I am so sick of this Relentless absurd um exhausting focus on ability which is just beside the point and um and uh they move us away from that and move us towards um this focus on um the exploitation of the ability that's already there and that's just a far more rational place to start if we had if we did everything in our power to exploit ability and we still saw differences in outcomes then we can talk Talent right
他们税收收入的50%，永久有效。换句话说，如果你能从这30个孩子里培养出三个程序员和两个医生，你就会变成一个非常非常有钱的人。而且顺便说一句，社会会好得多，孩子们也会更快乐，因为他们会拥有现在没有的东西——一个真正关心他们、并且有能力提高他们资本化率的人，把这个比率从零提到10%、15%、20%、35%，随便多少。我明白了。我不……当你把这个想法告诉别人时，很多人会觉得，哦，这听起来太……不管这个想法有什么问题，它都比我们现在的状况好得多，我们现在的状况是根本没人管这些孩子，对吧。但关键在于，资本化这个思路改变了讨论的方向。它让我们摆脱那种——我真的受够了这种没完没了的、荒谬的、令人疲惫的对『能力』的执着，那根本不是重点。呃，它让我们从那里走出来，转向关注怎么去开发利用已经存在的能力，而这才是一个远为理性的出发点。如果我们已经竭尽全力去开发人的能力，结果仍然看到差异，那我们再来谈天赋，对吧。
59:56
if we had if in America we had 25 million high school kids running 12 miles a day and we still were getting you know smoked at the Olympics in the 10,000 meters I will entertain every genetic argument you want about difference between us and East Africans but until we do that it's a pointless argument right that's what I so that's why I think we need to be much more inventive in our uh in our thinking about capitalization what if that Runners playing soccer hockey lacrosse football baseball basketball right like we spread our C pool over many more Sports than Pyon does yeah no no that's I mean that's was my point that it's apples and that because of those very very differen great differences in the way in which Talent athletic Talent is capitalized in these two cultures you can't draw any conclusions about inability you might be have a higher capitalization rate it's just div yeah just before Malcolm goes any further I want to come that he's going to have to leave the building cuz he has to go do a Talk At The Gates Foundation where I think he's going to be convincing them to make that investment in those kids or anything um but so so I know a everybody you know wants the book and I did have Malcolm has pre-signed tons of copies of the books
如果在美国，我们有两千五百万高中生每天跑十二英里，结果我们在奥运会一万米上还是被人碾压，那我愿意听你讲任何关于我们和东非人之间基因差异的论点。但在我们做到那一步之前，这种争论是没有意义的，对吧。这就是我为什么觉得，我们在关于资本化的思考上需要更有创造力。如果那些跑步的人去踢足球、打冰球、玩长曲棍球、橄榄球、棒球、篮球了呢？对吧，就是说我们把人才池分散到了比肯尼亚多得多的运动项目上。是的，对对，我说的就是这个意思，这是两码事。正因为在这两种文化中运动天赋被资本化的方式差别巨大，你根本没法就『能力高低』得出任何结论。你可能资本化率更高，只是分散开了而已。对。在马尔科姆继续讲下去之前我插一句，他马上得离开这栋楼了，因为他要去盖茨基金会做一个演讲，我猜他会在那儿说服他们对这些孩子做那笔投资什么的。呃，我知道大家都想要那本书，马尔科姆确实已经预先签好了很多本，
11牙买加、Title IX 与奴隶制的长影
61:16
so my question to you is we can have Malcolm answer questions for all of us for the next 15 minutes and then get in the car and get over the bridge or he can sign and personalize books for a very few of you so I'm thinking we're moving toward the questions yeah okay over there in the corner in the context of the capitalization where you were talking before about um Runners and I'm a big track fan in Jamaica island of only about a million people I think it's a million and a half now produces a disproportionate amount of sprinters and allow them run for other countries in the midd you think that falls into the same thing even though they have a small pool of people who are available to yeah well as some as you know I'm have to make and so I'm powerfully disposed to answer this question in a way that reflects um most flatteringly on Jamaica um Jamaica is it's a beautiful example of this right so um uh in this long running debate about nurture versus nature in running in sprinting especially you know the the quote unquote gene pool of Jamaica isn't any different than any number of other countries around the world and yet Jamaica utterly dominates sprinting this is a clear case where Cap rates for sprinting in Jamaica are must be very
所以我的问题是：我们可以让马尔科姆再花15分钟回答大家的问题，然后他上车过桥；或者他可以给你们中很少的几个人签名并写上题词。所以我想我们还是转到提问环节吧。好，那边角落里那位。接着你刚才讲的资本化，关于长跑运动员——我是个田径迷——牙买加这个只有大约一百万人口的岛国，我想现在大概是一百五十万，却产出了远超比例的短跑选手，还让其中一些人代表其他国家出赛。你觉得这也属于同样的情况吗，尽管他们可供选择的人口基数很小？嗯，对，你们知道我是牙买加裔，所以我在回答这个问题时，会强烈倾向于给牙买加脸上贴金。呃，牙买加是这方面一个绝佳的例子，对吧。在这场关于跑步、尤其是短跑的『先天与后天』长期争论里，牙买加所谓的『基因库』和世界上其他很多国家并没有什么不同，然而牙买加在短跑上却是绝对统治级的。这是一个很清楚的例子，说明牙买加短跑的资本化率一定非常
62:34
very close to 90% And I I I I have no real evidence for this other than anecdotally I was just in Jamaica for Christmas visiting my cousins and I'm a runner so I go was I would go running around you know in the little hills around um my aunt's house and I it was this hilarious thing there never Happ to be anywhere else that the sight of someone running in Jamaica is just just ignite some kind of thing in all passes by so here I am you know running along down the road and like people like slow down wave and like some guy will be trudging along back from work and he would say he would like he' go run run run oh oh he would run after me and like run with me for like it was just like this and I realized like this is it's an obsession right it's a complete Obsession and there is so much status associated with the act of running that if you have any you know even remote ability in this area you exploit it right and you know Usain Bolt at this point is a is a you know not since Bob Marley has has there been someone who has ignited this degree of so I think it's a beautiful illustration of of what I'm talking about so um you indicate that um this is all based on kind with Society values is so did you look at how long it would take a societal value change to impact the capitalization of the of the folks
非常接近90%。我对此其实没有什么真凭实据，只有一些轶事。我圣诞节刚去牙买加看我表亲，我自己是个跑步爱好者，所以我就在我姑妈家附近那些小山丘上跑步。这事儿特别好笑，在别的任何地方都不会发生：在牙买加，看到有人在跑步这件事，就是会点燃路过所有人的某种东西。所以我就在路上跑着，有人会放慢车速朝我挥手，有个下班往回走、拖着步子的哥们儿会喊『跑！跑！跑！』，然后他就追上来，跟我一起跑一段，就是这种感觉。我就意识到，这是一种痴迷，对吧，是彻底的痴迷。跑步这件事本身带着极高的社会地位，所以只要你在这方面有哪怕一点点天分，你就一定会去发挥它，对吧。而尤塞恩·博尔特到今天已经是——你知道，自鲍勃·马利以来，还没有人能点燃这样一种程度的热情。所以我觉得这是我所说的那件事的一个绝佳例证。那么，呃，你的意思是这一切都跟社会的价值观有关。那你有没有研究过，社会价值观的改变，要多久才会影响到人们的资本化率？
63:54
on it because you we're going to a new phase of political life here I think a lot of us are hoping that some new values pop out how long that those might take effect yeah yeah so I I'm a real Optimist in I believe these kinds of shifts can happen really quickly and let's let's stick with sports for a moment because Sports is a just a An Elegant way of um you think about what happened after Title Nine is it title n um so I was just with I saw a friend of mine um other day who has uh 12-year-old daughter so she's 40 something and she was talking about the difference that is between her upbringing and um her daughters and my friend is a is an athletic person in the sense that she's you know has no there's no but she did not play any sports at all as a kid so she grew up in an upper middle class family in Providence Road Island not some you know sticky play like you know Eastern Seaboard it never even occurred to her to do Sports none and in her daughter's life Sports is everything I mean not everything they they do the same amount of school work she did but they play so many organized Sports she can't keep track of it that is a capitalization our capitalization rate for women and soccer or basketball 20 only 25 or 30 years ago was what 5%
因为我们正在进入一个新的政治阶段，我想我们很多人都希望会有一些新的价值观冒出来。这些价值观要多久才会见效？对，对。我在这一点上是个真正的乐观主义者，我相信这类转变可以发生得非常快。我们还是先拿体育来说，因为体育是个特别漂亮的例子。想想『教育法第九条』（Title IX）通过之后发生了什么——是第九条吧？呃，我前几天刚见到我一个朋友，她有个十二岁的女儿，她自己四十几岁，她当时在讲她自己的成长经历和她女儿的差别。我这个朋友是个爱运动的人，就是说她并不是……但她小时候完全没有参加过任何体育运动。她在罗德岛普罗维登斯一个中上层家庭长大，不是什么偏僻地方，你懂的，就是东海岸。她连做运动这个念头都从来没有过，一次都没有。而在她女儿的生活里，体育就是一切——我是说也不是一切，她们的功课量和当年一样多，但她们参加的有组织的体育项目多到她都记不过来。这就是资本化。二三十年前，女性在足球或篮球上的资本化率是多少？5%？
65:16
2% 3% today it's 50 60 70% that's one generation it's an incredible shift in what we think of in our kind of priorities in that particular area that makes me profoundly optimistic about our ability to uh shift our capitalization um uh uh the the focus of our interest in other more consequential areas because let's face it that's not a very consequential area but if we can do it with you know with soccer I feel like we can do it with all kinds of other things but sure on your blind sing the SP give opportunities you go you raising your hand just now yes I don't have a question I was doing it for you you on The Blind Side yes okay thank you so much so my question is about sort of the opposite of the um positive impact of culture and the one you call that the right on negative historical impact of culture and I really want to explore your thoughts around um let's take slavery for example and S of the longstanding impact of slavery and what are your thoughts about outliers been that Community black community and and then sort of thr on the Obama impact
2%？3%？而今天是50%、60%、70%。这只用了一代人的时间，这是我们在那个特定领域里优先级观念的一次惊人转变。这让我对我们改变资本化率的能力、改变我们在其他更有实质意义的领域的关注点的能力，深感乐观。因为说实话，那并不是一个多么重大的领域，但如果我们能在足球这种事上做到，我觉得我们在各种别的事情上也能做到。当然。那关于你的《弱点》……提供机会……你刚才是不是在举手？是的，我没有问题，我是替你举的。你是说《弱点》？是的。好，非常感谢。我的问题是关于文化影响的另一面——不是正面影响，而是你说的那种文化带来的负面历史影响。我很想听听你的想法，呃，比如以奴隶制为例，还有奴隶制的长期影响，以及你对《异类》中黑人群体那部分的看法，然后再谈谈奥巴马带来的影响。
66:31
what do you think that will make and how long do so the question was about on the opposite side thinking about how things like the legacy of slavery have impacted um opportunity and um so I in the last chapter of my book is a personal chapter and it's about my it's the story of my mother's family um and it attempts to answer this very question um so my mother is a brown skinned Jamaican and um one of the points and I she has had this what what um I what anyone would consider a successful life she grew up in a little tiny Cottage in the middle of the hills of Jamaica and ended up a upper middle class professional in Canada right and I try to tell her story using the ideas of the book and focus not on her own pluck and intelligence but on the what are the kinds of opportunities that allowed her to do that and one of the things that I got into was the peculiarities of uh being a brown-skinned Jamaican and I trace my mother's family history back to uh in the 1700s a uh a plantation owner from Ireland comes to Jamaica and takes as his concubine basically I'm sure just bought and raped an African slave and that's the beginning of my that their son a guy named John Ford was the the beginning of my mother's line right um so in Jamaica
你觉得那会带来什么、要多久呢，所以这个问题问的是反过来的一面，就是像奴隶制的遗留影响这类东西是怎么影响机会的，嗯，所以我书的最后一章是很个人化的一章，讲的是我母亲家族的故事，嗯，它试图回答的正是这个问题，嗯，我母亲是个棕色皮肤的牙买加人，嗯，有一点是，她过的是任何人都会认为很成功的一生，她在牙买加山区里一间小小的农舍里长大，最后成了加拿大的中上层专业人士，对吧，我试着用这本书的思路来讲她的故事，重点不放在她自己的勇气和聪明上，而是放在到底是什么样的机会让她做到了这一切，其中我深入研究的一点是，做一个棕色皮肤的牙买加人有什么特殊之处，我把我母亲的家族史一直追溯到 1700 年代，一个来自爱尔兰的种植园主来到牙买加，把一个非洲女奴当作他的姘妇，基本上我敢肯定就是买来然后强奸的，而这就是我们家族的开端，他们的儿子，一个叫 John Ford 的人，就是我母亲这一支的开端，对吧，嗯，所以在牙买加
67:55
The Offspring The melat Offspring of a mixed race Union um in the 1700s was not put back into slavery the way that that child would have been in the in the American south on the contrary the Brits did this very very different thing which was if you were mixed race you got welcomed into the ruling class so John Ford one generation removed from a slave ship was a preacher he was a literate educated man who was a free was a free man in 1790 whatever it was and whose kids were free and on and on and if you trace my mother's family history down along with the history of all these other parallel Brown skinn Jamaicans you see a legacy of privilege that goes back generation upon generation upon generation you see people who are members of the entrepreneurial and Commercial and professional classes going back to the earliest earliest days of the 19th century right now that has given them um a status and a set of opportunities that are denied to people who who um who were pushed back into slavery their equivalents in America who weren't plucked out in 1790 and allowed to get an education but were pushed back in and enslaved for another three generations there is a world of difference between starting from where my mother started from and starting from
混血的后代，嗯，在 1700 年代，混血婚配生下的后代并不会被重新打回奴隶身份，而在美国南方那样的孩子就会被打回去，恰恰相反，英国人做了非常非常不一样的事，就是如果你是混血，你会被接纳进统治阶层，所以 John Ford，跟奴隶船只隔了一代人，就成了一名传教士，他是个识字的、受过教育的人，在 1790 年左右就是个自由人，他的孩子们也是自由的，一代接一代，而如果你顺着我母亲的家族史往下追，再对照所有其他类似的棕色皮肤牙买加人的历史，你会看到一份特权的传承，一代传一代传一代，你会看到这些人从 19 世纪最最早的时候起就已经是企业家阶层、商人阶层和专业人士阶层的一员了，对吧，这就给了他们一种地位和一整套机会，而这些是那些被推回奴隶制里的人得不到的，也就是他们在美国的对应者，那些没有在 1790 年被挑出来、被允许受教育，反而被推回去又当了三代人奴隶的人，从我母亲的起点出发，和从
69:11
where um she would have started from if her ancestors had been in Georgia or Alabama um you know interestingly as well along the same lines skip Gates the professor of African-American studies at Harvard did this really fascinating of genealogical studies of prominent and successful African-Americans and discovered that almost without fail if you look back several Generations into the families of these success stories what you find is either someone who was um who was a freed slave so freed before emancipation or a a freed slave who managed in the first generation after emancipation to own land in other words you see the same thing that success in the present day is a function of an opportunity that was created 2 3 four five generations previously right and that is the when we're talking about this flip side it reminds us that uh um of how the shadow of slavery those who were denied that kind of of get out of jail free card um that my mom got or that you know these other people that skip Gates looked at got to be denied for your ancestry to be denied that get out of jail free card matters even today right so now you asked about Obama what does the success of Obama tell us about the continuing significance of that Legacy nothing right nothing let's not I mean I
她假如祖先是在乔治亚州或阿拉巴马州、她会有的那个起点出发，这两者之间有天壤之别，嗯，你知道，沿着同样的思路，还有个很有意思的事，哈佛的非裔美国人研究教授 Skip Gates 做了一系列非常引人入胜的家谱研究，研究那些杰出而成功的非裔美国人，结果发现几乎无一例外，如果你往上追溯这些成功故事的家族好几代，你会发现要么有一个人是被解放的奴隶，也就是在废奴之前就获得自由，要么是一个被解放的奴隶在废奴后的第一代就设法拥有了土地，换句话说，你看到的是同一件事，今天的成功，是两代、三代、四代、五代之前被创造出来的某个机会的产物，对吧，而这个，当我们谈到这个反面的时候，它提醒我们，嗯，奴隶制的阴影有多深，那些被剥夺了这种免死金牌的人，嗯，我妈妈拿到了那张牌，或者你知道，Skip Gates 研究的那些人也拿到了，而你的祖先被剥夺了那张免死金牌，这件事在今天依然重要，对吧，那么现在你问到奥巴马，奥巴马的成功能告诉我们这份历史遗留至今仍有多大影响吗？什么都说明不了，对吧，什么都说明不了，我们别，我是说我
70:36
love him as much as anyone I could not be more thrilled about what's going to happen on Tuesday right I mean a relief of cataclysmic I might even become an American citizen now but but let's be but let's be clear his victory does not mean that this issue is over right it it you know and if that is how we interpret it then we're making a great mistake so then my followup question to that but those people in the room or outside who are involved in trying to help a population of people who are victims of the very thing you describe what are some best practices or some things that people should look at to help create more successes there are liers of course and there're people who are not from patto backgrounds who've been successful and there's something there I don't understand it but what are some of things to explore around creating more success stories yeah well that's the you know I wish I could give you a a kind of um a complete and satisfying answer to that um and I don't know I mean in my book I talk a little bit about just on this narrow question of how can you teach math to Inner City kids um and um can you can you get an inner city kid to think like an Asian when it comes to m math and the answer
跟任何人一样喜爱他，对于周二会发生的事，我不能更兴奋了，对吧，我是说那是一种天翻地覆的解脱，我说不定现在都要去入美国籍了，但是，但我们得说清楚，他的胜利并不意味着这个问题已经结束了，对吧，你知道，如果我们那样去理解它，那我们就犯了个大错。那我的追问是，在座的、或者场外的那些人，他们在努力帮助一群正是你所描述的那种境况的受害者，有哪些最佳做法，或者有哪些东西是大家可以去研究的，好帮助创造更多的成功案例？当然也有例外，也有不是那种背景出身却成功了的人，那里头有点什么，我还没弄明白，但在创造更多成功故事这件事上，有哪些方向值得探索？是啊，这个嘛，你知道，我真希望我能给你一个完整又令人满意的答案，嗯，可我不知道。我是说在我书里，我稍微谈了一点，就针对怎么教内城区孩子学数学这个很窄的问题，嗯，还有，你能不能让一个内城区的孩子在数学上像亚洲孩子那样思考，答案是
12下期预告：知更鸟与孟买篮球教练
71:56
is we think the answer is yes um we've seen extraordinary results with um with teaching math by changing attitudes about work um and that makes me think that we have all kinds of opportunities in other areas but what that effort looks like I don't know it's sort of it's a kind of thing that I hope others will um I'm sure others are already pursuing but that I think we need to know more about as a as a society right one more question what are you going to write about next next um I uh I have well have I have many many ideas one um one I'll give you a little preview of my next New Yorker article which is um well there's two in works one is an attack on te Killa mocking bird um because it turns out if you read no one has read this book since you were like 12 years old right so what do you know when you're 12 nothing reread it that's all I'll tell you and you discovered IUS Finch monster anyway coming soon um and another the other one which is will be even more near and dear to your hearts and I can't give you details but I'll give you the outline and by the way this is such a cool story I haven't had a one this cool a long time I met this guy from your world software entrepreneur whatever and you know the type he's like came from Mumbai
我们认为答案是肯定的，嗯，我们看到了非常了不起的结果，嗯，就是通过改变对待努力这件事的态度来教数学，嗯，这让我觉得我们在其他领域也有各种各样的机会，但那种努力具体长什么样，我不知道，这有点像是我希望别人去做的事，嗯，我相信已经有人在做了，但我觉得作为一个社会，我们需要对此了解得更多，对吧。再问一个问题，你接下来打算写什么？接下来，嗯，我，好吧，我有很多很多想法。其中一个，嗯，我给你们剧透一下我下一篇《纽约客》的文章，嗯，其实有两篇在写，一篇是批判《杀死一只知更鸟》的，嗯，因为事实证明，如果你读一读的话，没有人在十二岁之后还重读过这本书，对吧，那你十二岁的时候懂什么呢？什么都不懂。去重读一遍，我就只告诉你们这么多。然后你就会发现阿蒂克斯·芬奇是个怪物。总之，敬请期待。嗯，另一篇，另外那一篇你们会更加喜欢，我不能透露细节，但我可以给你们讲个大概，顺便说一句，这故事太酷了，我好久没碰上这么酷的了。我遇到一个你们这个圈子的人，软件创业者之类的，你知道那种类型，他就是从孟买来的
73:24
went to Caltech or MIT you know $30 in his pocket makes a a name for himself in Silicon Valley he has a daughter and his daughter uh wants to play She's 12 years old she wants to play basketball right now he's a KN about basketball he's a software programmer from Mumbai but he decides I want to coach my daughter's basketball team so he goes to a basketball game and he observes it right as an outsider would right we're talking about Outsiders he's an outsider you know he observes it and he comes away shaking his head thinking why do they play this game in such a Mindless fashion and so he decides to to teach his daughter and her teammates to play the game his way right and what happens now keep in mind this team is a team of girls taken they're all from like Mountain View and their fathers are all people like this guy they're the children of software programmers they are not big huge hulking mesomorphs with bulging muscles they're like little skinny girls with pigtails right what happens they almost win the state championship they don't win the state champion because they actually they get cheated in this outrageous way which is one of the great parts of the story but the whole point of the story and it's just so on every level genius it all has to do with what happens when a really
上了加州理工或者 MIT，你知道的，口袋里揣着三十美元，在硅谷闯出了名堂。他有个女儿，他女儿，嗯，想打球，她十二岁，她想打篮球，对吧，可他对篮球一窍不通，他是个从孟买来的软件程序员，但他决定，我要来当我女儿球队的教练。于是他去看了一场篮球比赛，他是以一个局外人的眼光去观察的，对吧，我们不是在讲局外人吗，他就是个局外人，你知道，他观察完之后摇着头走开了，心想他们为什么用这么没脑子的方式打这个比赛。于是他决定，要教他女儿和她的队友们按他的方式打球，对吧。接下来发生了什么？你要记住，这支球队全是女孩，她们都来自山景城那种地方，她们的父亲都是跟这家伙一样的人，她们是软件程序员的孩子，她们不是那种肌肉贲张的高大壮汉，她们就是些扎着小辫的瘦瘦的小姑娘，对吧。结果怎样？她们差一点就赢下了州冠军。她们没拿到州冠军，是因为她们其实是被人以一种极其离谱的方式给坑了，这也是这个故事最精彩的部分之一。但整个故事的重点，而且它在每个层面上都太���才了，全都在于，当一个真的
74:40
really smart guy from Mumbai decides to coach basketball and the answer is nothing that you've ever seen on a basketball court before but I only say this last little fact to which is during the games when he's doing this thing that he does and his these little girls with pigtail by the way they're not good basketball players P.S they're not going to go and play like division one they're like little skinny girls who spend who are G to they're all going to take physics of keltech they don't even interested in sports that much but they're like under the tul of this Mass genius mad genius um during the games as they're coaching the other the opposing coaches who are the ones steeped in the older Paradigm of basketball get so enraged by what's happening that they start by like you know just kind of sitting there in a stunned silence then they start screaming at their own girl these 12-y old girls start screaming at their own players as if it's their fault right and then like invariably they challenge this guy to a fight in the parking lot after the game anyway so look for that one too thank you all [Applause]
真的很聪明的孟买人决定去当篮球教练的时候，会发生什么？答案是，会发生你在篮球场上从没见过的事。不过我只再说最后一个小细节，就是在比赛当中，当他在做他那一套东西的时候，还有他那些扎着小辫的小姑娘们——顺便说一下，她们篮球打得并不好，附带说明，她们不会去打一级联赛的，她们就是些瘦瘦的小姑娘，她们将来都会去加州理工学物理，她们对体育其实都没那么感兴趣，但她们就在这个天才、这个疯狂天才的指导之下——在比赛当中，当他们在场边指挥的时候，对方那些教练，就是那些浸淫在旧篮球范式里的人，被眼前发生的事气到发疯，一开始他们只是坐在那儿，你知道，目瞪口呆地愣着，然后他们开始冲自己的球员大吼，冲这些十二岁的小姑娘大吼，好像这是她们的错似的，对吧，接着几乎每一次，他们都会在赛后约这家伙到停车场去打一架。总之，这篇也敬请期待。谢谢大家。[掌声]
视频总结 · 一句话概括与核心要点
一句话概括
Malcolm Gladwell 用《异类》的框架提出：决定成败的不是天赋差异，而是社会对既有天赋的"资本化率"（capitalization rate）——即有能力做某事的人中最终真正做成的比例，而贫困、制度性愚蠢和文化态度这三类约束，正在系统性地浪费大量人类潜能。
核心要点
- "资本化率"是全书真正的主题，而它低得惊人。 Michael Lewis 在《弱点》中追问东孟菲斯的数据：拿到大学体育奖学金的孩子里，只有六分之一真正进了大学——16%。而体育是美国投入注意力、金钱和智力资源最多的领域之一；如果最在乎的事只有 16%，不在乎的领域会低到什么程度。
- 贫困是最强的约束，强到能压垮"十亿分之一的大脑"。 Terman 在 1920 年代给 25 万加州学童做 IQ 测试，筛出智商 140+ 的前 0.1%，追踪 50 年。结果并非全员精英：约 15% 位居社会显要位置，中间一大批过着平庸的职业生活，底部一批按任何职业标准都算失败。Terman 逐一排除人格、习惯等解释后发现答案极其简单——成功的来自富裕家庭，失败的来自父母没上过大学、家中无书、缺乏学习习惯的制度与文化支持的贫困家庭。
- "愚蠢约束"：我们以为在选最强的孩子，其实只是在选最年长的。 2007 年捷克青年冰球队 20 人中 11 人生于 1—3 月；捷克青年足球队的名单同样极端偏向年初。原因是年龄分组的截止日是 1 月 1 日，而 10 岁时 10 个月的成熟度差异可能意味着几英寸身高、笨拙与协调的分别。被选中的孩子获得额外教练、比赛和鼓励，十年后"果然"最强——一个自我实现的预言。这意味着冰球的资本化率低于 50%，下半年出生的天赋被整体丢弃。
- 同一逻辑直接搬进教育，代价是可量化的。 一项跨西方国家、追踪数千名学生至大学阶段的研究发现：班级中相对最年幼的一批孩子上大学的概率比相对最年长的一批低 11%。解决方案在体育中很简单——按出生月份设三条平行赛道（1—4 月、5—8 月、9—12 月），各自发展到十几岁再选拔，资本化率可翻倍甚至三倍。不做，是因为我们拒绝承认自己设计的"精英选拔制"里藏着任意与不公。
- 东亚学生的数学优势是态度差异，不是天赋差异，而且有近乎荒谬的强证据。 TIMSS 考试附带一份 120 题的超长问卷，长到大多数孩子做不完。宾大的 Erling Boe 按"各国孩子答完问卷的比例"给国家排名，与按数学成绩的国家排名对比——两个排名完全一致，相关系数达 0.9x（社会科学史上罕见）。换言之，不必问一道数学题，只要看孩子能否坐下来对一项任务持续专注，就能预测该国数学水平。差距不在课程、师资、班级规模或教育经费，而在孩子面对代数题时脑中的预期：是"努力就能解出来"，还是"我天生会不会"。
- Gladwell 对这种态度给出的历史解释是稻作农业的遗产。 中世纪英格兰农民一年约劳作 1000 小时——黎明到中午、每周五天、冬天基本在睡觉、假日极多；同期华南或日本的农民约 3000 小时。水稻是已知最劳动密集、认知上最复杂的农业形态，要求黎明到黄昏、周末无休。他引用中国谚语"一年 360 天从早干到晚就不会挨饿"，主张这种对努力与坚持的文化编码在稻田消失几代之后仍留存，并完美迁移到代数与微积分上。他同时明确否定"西方人数学基因较差"的说法。
- 肯尼亚长跑与牙买加短跑，是资本化率而非基因的教科书案例。 据 Alberto Salazar，肯尼亚约有 100 万名 10—17 岁男生每天跑 10—12 英里，美国同龄段的数字大约 5000 人。美国长跑的资本化率不到 1%（可能 0.5%），肯尼亚接近 95%。牙买加仅约 150 万人口却统治短跑，同样因为"跑步"在当地拥有极高的地位与全民痴迷。他的方法论立场很硬：在把资本化率拉满之前，任何基因解释都是无效论证——"如果美国有 2500 万高中生每天跑 12 英里还是被碾压，我愿意听所有基因论证"。
- 10000 小时是解放性的，不是排他性的。 掌握认知复杂技能（下棋、脑外科、作曲、编程）几乎无例外需要约 10000 小时刻意练习，即每天 4 小时坚持 10 年。Gladwell 强调这恰恰否定了"天才"和"青春魔法"：卓越是严格投入的可预测产物，因此对任何年龄的人都开放。至于"今天该练什么"，他坦言无法回答——比尔·盖茨那代人的特点是在世界意识到某个领域重要之前就积累完了 10000 小时；今天的对应答案只有 15 岁的孩子知道。
- 最被忽视的一类是"劣势即优势"。 一项研究显示 30% 的美国创业者一生中被诊断过严重学习障碍（Branson、Charles Schwab、John Chambers 等）。读写困难的孩子若能挺过来，是靠从小学会委派（让别人替自己读写）、靠口头表达、靠不断解决问题、靠领导他人——而这四项正是创业成功的基石。佐证：读写障碍创业者中 80% 当过高中球队队长，非读写障碍创业者中这一比例是 30%。他把这一逻辑推向缩班教学：大量研究未能证明小班有收益（除极早期年级的极弱势儿童），可能正因为大班的"劣势"逼出了自立，而自立的价值不亚于教师反馈。他由此质疑曼哈顿一年三万美元的私立学校——把自己成功的来源（粗粝、异质的公立学校）掉头否定给下一代。
结论与值得注意的细节
- 核心态度转变：把"为什么有些群体不成功"的默认解释从"能力差异"转向"资本化效率"，因为后者是可干预的。这不是乐观主义修辞——他举 Title IX 为例：一代人之内，美国女性参与足球/篮球的资本化率从 2%—5% 跃升到 50%—70%，证明社会价值观的转向可以极快。
- 个人努力无法对抗结构性约束：被问及"4 月 27 日出生、想打少棒的孩子该怎么办"，他直言基本无解。他明确反对美国式"足够坚定就能克服一切障碍"的叙事——愚蠢约束之所以叫愚蠢，正因为它是集体层面强加的，强到能压垮最坚定的个体，只能在社会层面拆除。
- 一个大胆的思想实验：既然南中央洛杉矶某个一年级班级未来缴纳联邦税的期望值近乎为零，何不允许个人、团体或非营利组织"投资"这批孩子并分走其未来税收的一半？若能从 30 个孩子里养出 3 个程序员和 2 个医生，投资者会非常富有，社会更好，孩子也终于有了一个真正在乎并有能力提升他们资本化率的人。他自己承认这想法听起来怪，但"再糟也好过现在——没人在乎这些孩子"。
- 高资本化率不总是好事：肯尼亚让 100 万个 12 岁孩子每天跑 10 英里其实极其浪费，奥运名额只有三四个。美国把体育天赋分散到足球、篮球、棒球、长曲棍球等多个项目，是合理的资源配置——"我们只是不该一边这样做一边抱怨长跑成绩差"。
- 对"顶层扩容"路数的怀疑：被问到能否靠增加顶层席位（如扩编 NHL）倒逼资本化率提升时，他以科技业为反例——微软等公司长期抱怨顶尖人才短缺，但过去 25—30 年美国数学与科学的相对表现反而下滑。供给端的旺盛需求并没有自动提高资本化率。
- 文化遗产的持久性贯穿全书：阿巴拉契亚长期是美国最暴力的地区，他归因于苏格兰-爱尔兰移民从英国边境地带带来的"荣誉文化"。这一章是为"稻作解释东亚数学"做铺垫——难点在于要接受曾曾祖辈的谋生方式仍在影响今人的世界观。
- 关于种族与代际优势的最尖锐一段：他追溯自己牙买加母亲一系至 1700 年代——一名爱尔兰种植园主与一名非洲女奴的后代 John Ford。在牙买加，混血后代不会被推回奴隶身份，反而被英国人纳入统治阶层，因此 John Ford 在 1790 年代已是识字的自由传教士，其后代世代属于商业与专业阶层。而美国南方的对应者被推回奴役状态又持续三代——起点差了一个世界。Harvard 的 Skip Gates 对成功非裔美国人的家谱研究呼应了这点：几乎无一例外，往上追几代都能找到解放前被释放的祖先，或解放后第一代就拥有土地的祖先。成功往往是两三代甚至四五代之前某个机会的函数。 被问到奥巴马当选说明了什么，他的回答干脆：关于这一遗产是否终结，"什么都说明不了"，若如此解读就是大错。
- 他也承认解法的边界：被追问该如何具体帮助这些社区时，他没有给出完整答案，只说在"改变对努力的态度来教内城孩子数学"上已看到显著成效，其余"我不知道，希望别人去做"。
- 收尾的两个预告（New Yorker 文章）：一篇是重读《杀死一只知更鸟》后对 Atticus Finch 的批评；另一篇讲一位来自孟买的软件创业者以彻底的局外人视角重构篮球打法，带一群硅谷工程师的女儿（瘦小、扎马尾、并不打算走体育路）几乎打进州冠军赛，气得对方教练在场边冲自己 12 岁的球员咆哮、赛后在停车场约架。
核心句型 · 10
1. what is the rate at which … / how efficiently do we …
“What is the rate at which a society capitalizes on its potential”
把模糊的价值问题改写成可测量的比率问题。适合在提出新概念时使用：先给定义式设问，再给数字。仿写：what is the rate at which we convert research into products。
2. it's not X, it's not Y, it's not Z — it is W
“It's not in our curriculum it's not in the quality of our teachers it's not in the size of our classrooms … it is the attitude in the head of the child”
连续否定常见解释后再抛出真正答案，是演讲中最有力的收束节奏。仿写时前三项要选听众最容易想到的答案。
3. not a difference in degree … it is a difference in kind
“It is not a not a difference … from wheat farming is a difference in kind”
区分「程度差别」与「性质差别」的固定对举，用于强调两件事不能同尺度比较。学术写作与商业分析中都高度可用。
4. we think we are …, and we're not — we're …
“So we think we are picking the best and we're not we're picking the oldest”
先复述对方的自我认知，再一句掐断并给出真实描述。制造反转的最短句式，注意后半句要用同一动词结构呼应。
5. it stands to reason that …
“It stands to reason if the pool that you're pulling from is twice as big … the average level of talent should be higher”
表示「按逻辑自然可推出」，比 obviously 更克制、更像论证。常与 if 从句连用，适合在缺乏直接数据时做推断。
6. on the contrary, it says that …
“On the contrary I says I think it suggests the opposite”
用于纠正听众对自己观点的误读：先否认被安在自己头上的结论，再给出相反解读。注意 on the contrary 用于反驳，不等于 in contrast。
7. what sets them apart is simply that …
“What sets them apart is that simply that what we are seeing is the … predictable outcome of applying oneself”
去神秘化的定型句：把非凡表现归因于可复制的机制。simply 在此承担「祛魅」的语气功能，仿写时不可省。
8. so what if …? let me remind you that …
“So what if those kids can't play hockey … let me remind you that this is true of many sports”
先替听众说出轻视性的反驳，再用证据回击。演讲中处理潜在质疑的标准动作，比直接列证据更有对话感。
9. I will entertain every … argument, but until we do X, it's a pointless argument
“I will entertain every genetic argument you want … but until we do that it's a pointless argument”
设定举证顺序的强句式：不否认对方论点，只是把它排到条件满足之后。用于争议话题时既显开放又守住立场。
10. a disadvantage that ended up being an advantage
“It was it is in fact the reason I'm successful it is a disadvantage that ended up being an advantage”
同词根反义并置（advantage/disadvantage）制造记忆点。写作中可仿造 a constraint that turned out to be a resource 这类结构。
词汇精讲 · 159 · 按出现顺序
renowned
/rɪˈnaʊnd/
adj.
0:01
享有盛名的；常搭配 renowned for/as
staff writer
phr.
0:01
（杂志、报社的）专职撰稿人，区别于自由撰稿人
outliers
/ˈaʊtˌlaɪərz/
n.
0:01
离群值；引申为「异类、极端优秀者」
encapsulates
/ɪnˈkæpsjuleɪts/
v.
1:34
浓缩概括（要点）；encapsulate what the book is about
capitalization
/ˌkæpɪtələˈzeɪʃən/
n.
1:34
此处指「潜能兑现率」：有能力做某事的人中真正做成的比例
lineman
/ˈlaɪnmən/
n.
1:34
（美式橄榄球）锋线球员；offensive lineman 进攻锋线
drafted
/ˈdræftɪd/
v.
1:34
被职业联盟选秀选中（be drafted into the NFL）
kajillion
/kəˈzɪljən/
n.
2:58
俚语：天文数字般的一大笔（夸张说法）
slums
/slʌmz/
n.
2:58
贫民窟
floored
/flɔːrd/
v.
2:58
使震惊得说不出话；it floored me
exploiting
/ɪkˈsplɔɪtɪŋ/
v.
2:58
充分开发利用（此处中性，非「剥削」）
inner city
phr.
2:58
美国语境中的旧城贫困区，常与少数族裔、低收入相连
sobering
/ˈsoʊbərɪŋ/
adj.
4:19
发人深省的、让人冷静下来的（a sobering notion）
maximization
/ˌmæksɪməˈzeɪʃən/
n.
4:19
最大化
endeavor
/ɪnˈdevər/
n.
4:19
（有目标的）努力、事业领域；human endeavor 人类活动领域
dean
/diːn/
n.
5:38
（大学的）院长、教务长
cohort
/ˈkoʊhɔːrt/
n.
7:02
同期群、同一批人（研究术语）
prominence
/ˈprɑːmɪnəns/
n.
7:02
显要地位；positions of real prominence 真正显赫的位置
yard stick
/ˈjɑːrdstɪk/
n.
7:02
衡量标准、尺度（yardstick）
wrestle with
phr.
8:25
苦苦思索、努力应对（难题）
conceivable
/kənˈsiːvəbl/
adj.
8:25
可想象的；every conceivable explanation 所有能想到的解释
endow
/ɪnˈdaʊ/
v.
8:25
赋予（天赋、才能）；endow sb with sth
mediocrity
/ˌmiːdiˈɑːkrəti/
n.
9:36
平庸；worse than mediocrity 连平庸都不如
intimately
/ˈɪntɪmətli/
adv.
9:36
密切地、切身地（intimately connected with）
roster
/ˈrɑːstər/
n.
9:36
球队名单、花名册
skewed
/skjuːd/
adj.
10:52
偏斜的（统计）；skewed distribution 偏态分布
idiosyncratic
/ˌɪdiəsɪŋˈkrætɪk/
adj.
10:52
特有的、个别独有的；此处指「只是这支队的怪现象」
eligibility
/ˌelɪdʒəˈbɪləti/
n.
10:52
参赛/入选资格；eligibility cutoff 资格截止日期
maturity
/məˈtʃʊrəti/
n.
12:13
（生理）成熟度；10 months of maturity 多十个月的发育
clumsy
/ˈklʌmzi/
adj.
12:13
笨手笨脚、不协调的
lo and behold
phr.
12:13
结果你瞧（引出意料之中却被当成惊奇的结果，带反讽）
talent pool
phr.
12:13
人才库、可选材的人群
self-fulfilling prophecy
phr.
13:17
自我实现的预言：预期本身促成了所预期的结果
by rights
phr.
13:17
按理说、照理应当
on the table
phr.
13:17
leave sth on the table：白白放弃本可获得的东西
arbitrary
/ˈɑːrbɪtreri/
adj.
14:30
武断的、随意设定的（规则）
cling to
phr.
14:30
死抱着（信念、观念）不放
naive
/naɪˈiːv/
adj.
14:30
天真的、想得过于简单的
meritocracies
/ˌmerɪˈtɑːkrəsiz/
n.
14:30
精英选拔体制（按才能分配地位的制度）
squandered
/ˈskwɑːndərd/
v.
17:09
白白浪费（机会、潜能、金钱）
glaring
/ˈglerɪŋ/
adj.
17:09
显而易见的、刺眼的（a glaring example）
attitudinal
/ˌætɪˈtuːdɪnl/
adj.
17:09
态度层面的（attitudinal constraint）
irrefutable
/ˌɪrɪˈfjuːtəbl/
adj.
18:21
无可辩驳的（证据、数据）
entails
/ɪnˈteɪlz/
v.
18:21
必然涉及、需要；what solving that problem entails
innate
/ɪˈneɪt/
adj.
18:21
天生的、先天的（innate ability）
what have you
phr.
18:21
诸如此类、等等（列举后收尾的口语说法）
questionnaire
/ˌkwestʃəˈner/
n.
19:41
问卷（注意重音在末音节）
correlation
/ˌkɔːrəˈleɪʃn/
n.
20:55
相关性、相关系数
aptitude
/ˈæptɪtuːd/
n.
20:55
资质、天分（aptitude for mathematics）
deficit
/ˈdefɪsɪt/
n.
20:55
缺口、短板；此处指教育上的差距
underlying
/ˌʌndərˈlaɪɪŋ/
adj.
20:55
潜在的、底层的（underlying difference in talent）
ludicrous
/ˈluːdɪkrəs/
adj.
22:18
荒唐可笑的
digress
/daɪˈgres/
v.
22:18
离题、跑题（演讲常用：let me digress for a moment）
Venture
/ˈventʃər/
v.
22:18
大胆提出（看法、猜测）；venture an explanation
plausible
/ˈplɔːzəbl/
adj.
22:18
貌似成立的、说得通的（未必已证实）
bizarre
/bɪˈzɑːr/
adj.
22:18
离奇古怪的
labor intensive
phr.
23:43
劳动密集型的
peasant
/ˈpeznt/
n.
23:43
（前现代的）农民、佃农
dawn to dusk
phr.
23:43
从黎明到黄昏、起早贪黑
difference in kind
phr.
23:43
种类上的差别（对比 difference in degree 程度差别）
drank themselves silly
phr.
23:43
喝得烂醉；drink oneself silly 的过去式用法
inconceivable
/ˌɪnkənˈsiːvəbl/
adj.
25:15
不可想象的、根本不可能的
makeup
/ˈmeɪkʌp/
n.
25:15
构成、秉性；part of your makeup 你性格构成的一部分
reductive
/rɪˈdʌktɪv/
adj.
25:15
还原论的、把复杂问题简化的（贬义）
Legacy
/ˈlegəsi/
n.
25:15
遗留、传承下来的东西
genetic makeup
phr.
26:41
基因构成
elegant
/ˈelɪgənt/
adj.
26:41
（论证、解法）简洁而漂亮的
glimmer
/ˈglɪmər/
n.
29:25
一丝微光；a glimmer of 一点点（迹象、内容）
deliberate practice
phr.
30:44
刻意练习：有目标、有反馈、持续超出舒适区的训练
apply themselves
phr.
30:44
全力投入、专心致志（apply oneself to sth）
inherent
/ɪnˈhɪrənt/
adj.
30:44
内在固有的（inherent in their minds）
sets them apart
phr.
30:44
使其与众不同；set sb apart from others
liberating
/ˈlɪbəreɪtɪŋ/
adj.
32:03
令人解放的、让人卸下负担的
mitigation
/ˌmɪtɪˈgeɪʃn/
n.
32:03
缓解、减轻（mitigation strategy 应对策略）
clustered
/ˈklʌstərd/
v./adj.
32:03
聚集、扎堆（highly clustered in）
strain
/streɪn/
n.
32:03
（思想、风格的）一脉、一种倾向；a strain in American thinking
imposed
/ɪmˈpoʊzd/
v.
33:28
强加（规则、限制）；impose sth on sb
crippling
/ˈkrɪplɪŋ/
adj.
34:48
严重削弱的、致残式的（crippling to your motivation）
came across
phr.
34:48
偶然遇到、碰见（come across examples）
dyslexics
/dɪsˈleksɪks/
n.
36:12
阅读障碍者；dyslexia 阅读障碍
learning disability
phr.
36:12
学习障碍（医学/教育诊断术语）
entrepreneurialism
/ˌɑːntrəprəˈnɜːriəlɪzəm/
n.
36:12
创业精神、创业取向
compensate
/ˈkɑːmpənseɪt/
v.
36:12
补偿、代偿（compensate for a weakness）
delegate
/ˈdeləgeɪt/
v.
37:31
把任务委派给他人（管理学核心词）
Cornerstone
/ˈkɔːrnərstoʊn/
n.
37:31
基石；at the cornerstone of 处于……的根基位置
payoff
/ˈpeɪˌɔːf/
n.
38:47
回报、收益；no payoff to 对……没有回报
Reams
/riːmz/
n.
38:47
大量（成令的纸）；reams of studies 堆积如山的研究
a total wash
phr.
38:47
完全打平、毫无差别（口语）
self-reliance
/ˌself rɪˈlaɪəns/
n.
40:04
自立、自力更生
resolutely
/ˈrezəluːtli/
adv.
40:04
坚决地；resolutely uninterested 铁了心不感兴趣
ranting
/ˈræntɪŋ/
v.
40:04
激动地长篇大论、发牢骚（rant on）
cognitive dissonance
phr.
41:22
认知失调：信念与行为相互矛盾时的心理状态
heterogeneous
/ˌhetərəˈdʒiːniəs/
adj.
41:22
成分多元、异质的（反义 homogeneous）
Rough and Tumble
phr.
41:22
粗粝混乱、你争我夺的（环境）
cope
/koʊp/
v.
41:22
应对、招架（cope with）
debunk
/diːˈbʌŋk/
v.
42:43
揭穿、驳倒（迷思、错误说法）
anomalous
/əˈnɑːmələs/
adj.
42:43
反常的、不合模式的
invariably
/ɪnˈveriəbli/
adv.
43:59
一贯地、无一例外地
middleman
/ˈmɪdlmæn/
n.
43:59
中间商、中介人
put your foot down
phr.
43:59
态度强硬、坚决不让步
social standing
phr.
43:59
社会地位、社会声望
disproportionate
/ˌdɪsprəˈpɔːrʃənət/
adj.
45:17
不成比例的（远高于其人口占比）
by definition
phr.
46:48
按定义来说、从定义上必然如此
persist
/pərˈsɪst/
v.
48:10
持续存在、留存（文化、现象）
Peter out
phr.
48:10
逐渐减弱直至消失
Borderlands
/ˈbɔːrdərlændz/
n.
48:10
边境地带；此处指英格兰-苏格兰边区
Lawless
/ˈlɔːləs/
adj.
48:10
无法无天的、法律不及的
culture of Honor
phr.
49:34
荣誉文化：名誉受损须以强硬回击的社会规范
stands to reason
phr.
49:34
按理说、合乎逻辑地可以推出（it stands to reason that…）
Barren
/ˈbærən/
adj.
49:34
贫瘠的、荒芜的
grasp
/græsp/
v.
49:34
领会、把握（难懂的道理）
denominator
/dɪˈnɑːmɪneɪtər/
n.
50:54
分母；此处比喻可供选材的基数
median
/ˈmiːdiən/
n./adj.
50:54
中位数（不同于 average 平均数）
smoked
/smoʊkt/
v.
50:54
俚语：被彻底击败、被完爆（get smoked）
anomalies
/əˈnɑːməliz/
n.
52:07
异常个例；maturational anomalies 发育上的异常个体
thought experiment
phr.
53:22
思想实验：仅在推理中进行的假设性实验
Perpetual
/pərˈpetʃuəl/
adj.
54:43
长期不断的、无休止的（perpetual shortage）
eroded
/ɪˈroʊdɪd/
v.
54:43
被侵蚀、逐渐削弱（此处指表现下滑）
tier
/tɪr/
n.
54:43
层级、梯队（a whole tier of companies）
supply side
phr.
54:43
供给侧（经济学中与 demand side 相对）
underpinnings
/ˈʌndərpɪnɪŋz/
n.
55:56
支撑基础、底层条件（societal underpinnings）
emulate
/ˈemjuleɪt/
v.
55:56
效仿、以之为榜样
whine about
phr.
55:56
抱怨、发牢骚（带贬义）
wacky
/ˈwæki/
adj.
55:56
异想天开的、古怪的（口语）
a cut of
phr.
57:13
（收益的）一份分成；give sb a cut of
in perpetuity
/ɪn ˌpɜːrpəˈtuːəti/
phr.
58:35
永久地（法律、合同用语）
beside the point
phr.
58:35
不是重点、离题（比 irrelevant 更口语）
Relentless
/rɪˈlentləs/
adj.
58:35
不间断的、没完没了的
entertain
/ˌentərˈteɪn/
v.
59:56
考虑、认真对待（想法、可能性）——非「娱乐」义
inventive
/ɪnˈventɪv/
adj.
59:56
有创造力的、善于出新点子的
disposed
/dɪˈspoʊzd/
adj.
61:16
倾向于……的；be disposed to do sth
flatteringly
/ˈflætərɪŋli/
adv.
61:16
美言地、往脸上贴金地
nurture versus nature
phr.
61:16
后天培养与先天禀赋之争（常序为 nature vs nurture）
anecdotally
/ˌænɪkˈdoʊtəli/
adv.
62:34
仅凭个例见闻地（与系统证据相对）
trudging
/ˈtrʌdʒɪŋ/
v.
62:34
拖着沉重步子走
ignite
/ɪgˈnaɪt/
v.
62:34
点燃、激起（热情、反应）
obsession
/əbˈseʃn/
n.
62:34
痴迷、执念
upbringing
/ˈʌpbrɪŋɪŋ/
n.
63:54
成长过程、家庭教养
keep track of
phr.
63:54
记得清、跟得上（数量或进展）
consequential
/ˌkɑːnsɪˈkwenʃl/
adj.
65:16
有重大影响的、举足轻重的
pluck
/plʌk/
n.
66:31
胆识、韧劲（略旧式的褒义词）
concubine
/ˈkɑːŋkjubaɪn/
n.
66:31
妾、姘妇（历史语境）
peculiarities
/pɪˌkjuːliˈærətiz/
n.
66:31
特殊之处、独有的性质
Offspring
/ˈɔːfsprɪŋ/
n.
67:55
子女、后代（单复数同形）
literate
/ˈlɪtərət/
adj.
67:55
识字的、有读写能力的
ruling class
phr.
67:55
统治阶层
genealogical
/ˌdʒiːniəˈlɑːdʒɪkl/
adj.
69:11
家谱的、世系研究的
emancipation
/ɪˌmænsɪˈpeɪʃn/
n.
69:11
解放；美国语境特指废除奴隶制
without fail
phr.
69:11
无一例外地、必定
get out of jail free card
phr.
69:11
源自大富翁游戏，喻「免罪金牌／脱身特权」
flip side
phr.
69:11
（事情的）另一面、反面
cataclysmic
/ˌkætəˈklɪzmɪk/
adj.
70:36
天翻地覆的、剧变性的
near and dear to your hearts
phr.
71:56
你们最在意、最贴心的（事）
hulking
/ˈhʌlkɪŋ/
adj.
73:24
高大笨重的、块头很大的
mesomorphs
/ˈmezəmɔːrfs/
n.
73:24
中胚型体型者：肌肉发达、骨架结实的人
pigtails
/ˈpɪgteɪlz/
n.
73:24
（女孩的）辫子、双马尾
Mindless
/ˈmaɪndləs/
adj.
73:24
不动脑子的、机械的
steeped in
phr.
74:40
浸淫于、深受……熏陶（steeped in tradition）
enraged
/ɪnˈreɪdʒd/
adj.
74:40
暴怒的、被激怒的
理解自测 · 11 题
1. 格拉德威尔说的「capitalization rate（兑现率）」具体指什么？他用哪两个数字来说明它？
兑现率指一个社会把成员潜能真正转化为成就的比例——有能力做某事的人当中，最终真正做成的百分比。他在开场用了两组数字：一是《弱点》作者刘易斯的跟进调查，孟菲斯东区拿到大学体育奖学金的孩子只有六分之一（约16%）真正上了大学；二是全场结尾处的长跑对比，肯尼亚约有一百万名10到17岁男生每天跑十到十二英里，美国同类人数约五千，由此推出肯尼亚兑现率约95%、美国不到1%。这两个数字的作用相同：在美国最擅长、投入资源最多的领域，兑现率也低得惊人。
2. 特曼研究原本要证明什么？最后发现区分成败的因素是什么？
特曼是斯坦福心理学家，二十年代给约二十五万加州学生做智商测试，筛出智商140以上的顶尖0.1%，追踪五十年，原假设是智商是人生成就最强的决定因素，这批人将成为学界、产业界和政界的领袖。追踪结果否定了他自己：这群天才成年后分化成三层——顶端约15%占据显要位置，中间一大批过着普通的职业生涯，底端一批按任何职业标准都算失败。特曼逐项排除性格、习惯等解释后，落到唯一稳定的区分变量：家庭出身。成功的来自富裕家庭，失败的出自父母没上过大学、家里没有书的贫困家庭。
3. 捷克青年冰球队和足球队的出生日期名单说明了什么机制？
两份名单都极度偏向一年的前三个月：冰球队20人中11人生于1至3月，足球队名单前十几个几乎全在一季度。机制是年龄分组的截止日定在1月1日，同组内1月出生的孩子比12月出生的多近12个月发育，10岁时可能差三四英寸身高和协调性。教练在10岁左右选拔时以为在挑最有天赋的，实际是在挑最年长的，随后又给这批人额外教练、训练和比赛，十年后他们真的成了最好的。格拉德威尔称之为自我实现的预言：选拔制造了它声称在识别的差距。
4. Erling Boe 的问卷发现是什么？格拉德威尔用它推出了什么结论？
国际数学测评 TIMSS 在考试同时会发一份约120题的背景问卷，因为太长，多数学生答不完。宾大的 Erling Boe 按各国学生的问卷完成率给国家排名，发现这个排名与各国数学成绩排名几乎完全一致。格拉德威尔的推论是：要预测一国数学水平，根本不必问数学题，只要看学生愿不愿意长时间坐着专注完成一件枯燥的任务。由此他把东亚的数学优势从「天赋或资质差异」重新定义为「兑现率差异」——差的不是数学能力，而是把能力兑现出来的态度。
5. 他为什么说西方数学教育的短板不在课程、师资、班额或经费？这一判断和他后面讲班级规模的段落如何呼应？
因为问卷完成率这个与数学内容无关的指标就足以预测成绩，说明起作用的是学生面对难题时的预期——认为努力就能解出，还是认为取决于天生能力。这排除了投入型解释。后面回答家长关心班级规模时，他给出同向证据：除了极低年级的弱势儿童，大量研究找不到缩小班额的可测收益，家长每年多花两万五千美元买19人小班在数据上是白花。两段共同指向同一个判断：西方教育讨论过度集中在可花钱买的投入变量上，而真正的杠杆在态度与制度设计。
6. 「劣势即优势」这一象限他举了哪些证据？其中最容易被忽略的漏洞是什么？
他举了三组：约30%的美国创业者曾被诊断学习障碍，布兰森、施瓦布、Kinko's 创始人、思科CEO钱伯斯都是阅读障碍者；阅读障碍创业者中80%当过高中运动队队长，非阅读障碍者只有30%；以及大班可能逼出自立，从而抵消教师关注不足。机制是补偿：不会读写的孩子被迫学会委派、口头沟通、解决问题和领导，而这正是创业成功的四项核心技能。最容易被忽略的漏洞是存活者偏差——他自己也说了「很多孩子并没有挺过来」，我们只看见了补偿成功的那一批，无法据此推断阅读障碍整体上是优势。
7. 从稻作文化推出东亚数学优势，这条论证链需要哪个额外前提？他自己怎么处理这个前提？
需要的前提是：文化模式、准则和态度会在产生它们的生产方式消失之后仍长期留存，并能迁移到全新的任务上。今天在首尔或新加坡学数学的孩子本人、父母甚至祖父母都不是稻农，如果文化不能跨代滞留，稻作解释就断裂。他在回答哈伦县「荣誉文化」的提问时正面处理了这一点：阿巴拉契亚的暴力水平不能用当地当下条件解释，只能追溯到几百年前苏格兰-爱尔兰边境移民带来的荣誉文化。他坦承这一步「对很多人来说不容易把握」，也承认稻作解释「多半不是全部原因」。
8. 他为什么说提高兑现率并不总是好事？这个自我修正削弱了他前面的论证吗？
在回答企业投资社区数学项目的问题时，他反过来说：让一百万个十二岁孩子每天跑十英里去争奥运队三四个名额，其实极其浪费；美国长跑兑现率只有1%可能反而是合理的资源配置，我们只是不该因此抱怨成绩。这不削弱前面的论证，反而收紧了它：他的主张从来不是「兑现率越高越好」，而是「在做出能力差异的结论之前，必须先排除兑现率差异」。到结尾他把这一点讲成举证顺序——等美国有两千五百万高中生每天跑十二英里仍被碾压，他才愿意听基因论。
9. 他区分「贫穷约束」和「愚蠢约束」的实际意义在哪里？为什么对4月27日出生的棒球少年他说「没什么可做的」？
两者的区别在于责任主体和可行的干预层级。愚蠢约束是集体在制定规则时武断设下的——比如年龄分组的截止日期，它强到连极有决心的个体也穿不透，因此只能通过改制度解决，办法就是按发育月龄设立平行联赛、十五六岁再合流选拔。他之所以对那个孩子说「没什么可做的」，是刻意反驳美国叙事中「只要个人够坚定就能克服一切障碍」的假设：捷克有大量年末出生、同样想成为职业球员的孩子，名单上的缺席就是他们努力不够用的证据。承认这一点，才能把问题从个人励志推回制度设计。
10. 假如有人反驳：东非跑者的统治力仍可能有基因基础，而牙买加短跑的例子同样如此。按他在现场的论证方式，他会怎么回应？
他会先接受这个可能性但拒绝当前的举证顺序：他在结尾明确说，一旦美国也有两千五百万高中生每天跑十二英里而仍然被碾压，他愿意听任何基因论证；在此之前争论没有意义。其次他会指出可比性问题——现场有听众提出美国把人才池分散到足球、篮球、橄榄球等多个项目，他当即认可，说正因两种文化兑现方式差别巨大，跨文化比较根本推不出能力结论。第三，牙买加的例子对他有利：其所谓基因库与许多国家并无显著不同，真正特殊的是跑步在当地自带极高社会地位，任何一点天分都会被立刻发掘。
11. 把「兑现率」框架搬到今天的企业或 AI 时代人才选拔上，还成立吗？现场哪一段对应了这个迁移，有什么风险？
框架仍成立，且现场已有人做过这个迁移：一位微软听众把它用于公司内部创新，指出运营或支持岗位的好点子因缺乏打捞机制而流失，这正是组织版的「愚蠢约束」。风险在于格拉德威尔自己给出的两条反例。一是顶端扩容未必奏效——高科技行业长期喊人才短缺，却没有拉高美国数理教育的兑现率，二三十年里相对表现反而下滑，说明单靠增加岗位不能自动改善选材。二是他的兑现率并非越高越好的修正：把大量人力压进单一赛道去争少数名额是浪费。因此可迁移的是「先排查选拔规则的武断性，再谈能力差异」这一诊断顺序，而不是简单地把比率往上推。
下载便签
手机：长按图片也可保存
← 上一期 · NO.075Last Lecture Series: “How to Live an Asymmetric Life,” Graham Weaver
下一期 · NO.077 →Shoshana Zuboff on surveillance capitalism | VPRO Documentary
订阅苏菲周报
每周一封：本周入库的精读、一个值得带走的问题、一条苏菲按。免费，随时退订。
免费 · 每周一封 · 一键退订
苏菲拉底
THE SOPHIE LAB · ASK THE BEST MINDS THE BIG QUESTIONS
内容仅供学习 · thesophielab.com