I catch myself doing this more often than I like.
我發(fā)現我經(jīng)常這樣，到了我難以忍受的地步。
In general, it’s easier to ask open questions than to give confident answers. There’s no social penalty for appearing open-minded – but if you take a stand and get it wrong (or just different), better watch out.
總的來(lái)說(shuō)，提出開(kāi)放式的問(wèn)題確實(shí)比自信地給出答案來(lái)得更容易。因為表現得思想開(kāi)明不會(huì )招致別人的責難，但倘若你選錯了立場(chǎng)，站錯了隊（或者僅僅是不同的觀(guān)點(diǎn)），你就最好小心了。
Of course, there’s nothing wrong with wanting input from other people, especially people you respect. And there’s certainly nothing wrong with admitting you don’t have all the facts.
當然，想要聽(tīng)聽(tīng)他人的意見(jiàn)，尤其是你所尊重的人的意見(jiàn)沒(méi)什么不對。而承認你并不了解全部事實(shí)也絕對沒(méi)錯。
But it’s equally important to recognize the difference between genuinely not knowing the answer and lacking the conviction to accept the answer you already have.
但認清你是真不知道答案還是無(wú)法確信你已有的答案也同樣重要。
***
***
Dictionary.com defines an authority as (among other things): “an accepted source of information, advice, etc.”
Dictionary.com是這樣定義“權威”的（除去其他意思）：“公認的信息源、意見(jiàn)等。”
Authority is a social safety net. It’s okay to be wrong, as long as you can blame it on an authoritative source that is also wrong. It’s not as embarrassing to botch a basic scientific fact, if you can say that you were misled by an incorrect entry in the Encyclopedia Britannica.
權威像是一張社交安全網(wǎng)。即使你犯了錯也沒(méi)關(guān)系，只要你可以將其歸責于一個(gè)權威的信息源，指出它也錯了就行。弄錯一個(gè)基本的科學(xué)事實(shí)也沒(méi)什么可尷尬的，你大可以說(shuō)你被大英百科全書(shū)中的某個(gè)錯誤條目誤導了。
Most of the time, when people ask broad questions about difficult issues, they’re not so much looking for answers as for authority, for a safety net to fall back on.
大多數情況下，當人們對一些棘手話(huà)題提出開(kāi)放式問(wèn)題的時(shí)候，他們并不意圖得到答案，而更多地是在尋求一個(gè)權威，一張保護網(wǎng)來(lái)作為犯錯時(shí)的退路。
Thus, people who are good at appearing authoritative often have a lot of power and influence. These people are willing to take the risk of having an opinion, and so others flock to them, like pedestrians running for shelter during a downpour.
因此，那些善于扮演成權威人士的人也就有了更大的權力和影響力。這些人甘冒風(fēng)險大膽發(fā)表自己的意見(jiàn)，其他人就會(huì )隨之聚集在其周?chē)?，就像行人在下暴雨時(shí)尋求遮蔽物一樣。
This power can be abused – see political punditry – or it can be an opportunity. Wherever there’s rampant uncertainty, those who are willing to be certain (at the risk of being wrong) are given the chance to lead. This works in politics, in office politics, and in pretty much every social context.
這種權力可能被濫用——看看政治上的權威專(zhuān)家的意見(jiàn)便知——但也可能是個(gè)機遇。不管什么時(shí)候，當人們陷入不確定時(shí)，那些愿意給出確定意見(jiàn)的人（盡管有犯錯的風(fēng)險）便有機會(huì )成為意見(jiàn)領(lǐng)袖。這在政壇、職場(chǎng)以及其他很多社會(huì )場(chǎng)合都適用。
***
***
Conviction is the strength to hold onto your personal opinion.
信念就是堅持自我主張的力量。
Confidence is the strength to share and defend that opinion in public.
自信是在公眾中傳播和維護這一主張的力量。
Authority is the power you get as a result.
權威則是這之后你能得到的權力。
How can you apply this to what you do?
怎樣將這個(gè)法則運用到行動(dòng)中呢？
***
***
Even if you plan on having an open discussion, it’s usually better to go in armed with a point of view. You can always change it later if there’s a compelling reason. Here’s a good example of that approach in action.
即便是在你打算展開(kāi)自由討論的時(shí)候，你也最好帶著(zhù)自己的觀(guān)點(diǎn)參與進(jìn)去。當一個(gè)有說(shuō)服力的理由出現時(shí)，你隨時(shí)可以再改變你的觀(guān)點(diǎn)。這里有一個(gè)在實(shí)踐中運用此法的優(yōu)秀案例。
***
***
George Crane once said, “You can have such an open mind that it is too porous to hold a conviction.”
喬治·科瑞恩（George Crane）曾說(shuō)過(guò)：“你可以有一個(gè)開(kāi)闊的心胸，但它可能開(kāi)闊到無(wú)法承載信念。”
Where do you draw the line with what you believe? How far are you willing to entertain opposing points of view, and when do you say enough?
你會(huì )在什么地方發(fā)表你所信奉的觀(guān)點(diǎn)呢？對于相反的觀(guān)點(diǎn)你能容忍到什么時(shí)候？你容忍的極限又在哪里呢？
聯(lián)系客服
