- 注释版
- 纯净版
来源:
[1] A little after midnight, while writing this review, I took a break to get some beer from my local supermarket. As I stood in line the lights suddenly dimmed throughout the store. I must have looked puzzled. “We do that because less people come in this late,” the clerk explained. “There are fewer customers, so we need less light?” I asked. “Correct,” he said. His non sequitur had me leaving the store fortified with both a six-pack and the reinforced conviction that books on how to think should be required reading in high schools across the country. “Mindware: Tools for Smart Thinking,” by the psychologist Richard E. Nisbett, and “Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction,” by the psychologist Philip E. Tetlock and the journalist Dan Gardner, are two such books.
throughout：遍及，到处
例：These magazines are sold at bookstores throughout the country.
这些杂志在全国各地书店均有发售。
non sequitur：不合逻辑的推论
例：And we can see why a non sequitur is an invalid argument.
我们能看到为什么不当结论是无效论点。
[2] The six sections of “Mindware” offer a variety of perspectives on how we think: the role of the unconscious in our judgments and decisions; the lessons of behavioral economics; the principles of probability and statistics; recommendations for how to test your ideas; and two sections on reasoning and the nature of knowledge.
nature：本质
例：you have some mistaken ideas about the nature of happiness
你对于幸福的性质有一些错误的观点。
[3] Nisbett is famous for his groundbreaking work in several areas of psychology; Malcolm Gladwell called him “the most influential thinker in my life.” And so a book from Nisbett on this important subject is bound to be met with high expectations.
groundbreaking：开创性的
例：This is another groundbreaking, first time ever surgery.
这是外科手术史上另一个开创性的例子。
influential：有影响力的; 有权势的
例：He had been influential in shaping economic policy.
他在制定经济政策方面曾起过很大作用。
be bound to：必然...
例：there is bound to be a change of plan
计划必然需要被调整一下。
[4] My verdict is mixed. If you are looking for a survey of the topics covered in the book’s six sections, this is a good one. You’ll learn about our overzealousness to see patterns, our hindsight bias, our loss aversion, the illusions of randomness and the importance of the scientific method, all in under 300 pages of text. But there isn’t much in “Mindware” that is new, and if you’ve read some of the many recent books on the unconscious, randomness, decision making and pop economics, then the material covered here will be familiar to you.
verdict：判断
例：The doctor's verdict was that he was entirely healthy.
这名医生的判断是他完全是健康的。
overzealousness：过分热心的
hindsight：事后的聪明，马后炮
例：With hindsight, we'd all do things differently.
事后想来，我们可能都会以不同的方式做事。
[5] Nisbett writes clearly, and he takes his time with difficult concepts ranging from multiple regression (which answers the question, Given many variables that contribute to some outcome, what is the effect of each?) to dialectical reasoning (a method of argument for resolving opposing views in order to establish truth). But the dry tone of the book, along with Nisbett’s practice of telling us what he is going to say and reiterating what he has just said, gives “Mindware” a textbook feel.
take one's time：从容不迫；不著急
例：Take your time deciding.
不急，您慢慢决定。
dialectical：辩证的
例：The essence of dialectical thought is division.
辩证思想的实质是二分法。
[6] Where “Mindware” addresses the issue of making sense of a complex world from many angles, “Superforecasting” focuses on one issue: how we form theories of what will happen in the future. “Superforecasting” is a sequel of sorts to Tetlock’s 2005 book “Expert Political Judgment,” in which he analyzed 82,361 predictions made by 284 experts in fields like political science, economics and journalism. He found that about 15 percent of events they claimed had little or no chance of happening did in fact happen, while about 27 percent of those labeled sure things didn’t. Tetlock concluded that the experts did little better than a “dart-throwing chimp.”
forecast：预言
例：The teacher forecast that 15 of his pupils would pass the examination.
这位教师预测他的学生将有15名通过考试。
[7] The primate metaphor resurfaces in this new book. The authors single out Thomas Friedman of The New York Times for being an “exasperatingly evasive” forecaster, and they point to the inaccuracy of financial pundits at CNBC, whose performance prompted Jon Stewart to remark, “If I’d only followed CNBC’s advice, I’d have a million dollars today — provided I’d started with a hundred million dollars.”
resurface：再次出现
single out：挑出；挑选
例：To single out such women, she came up with a clever test.
为了挑出这样的女人，她想出了一个聪明的测试
pundit：权威; 专家
例：a well-known political pundit.
一位著名的政治权威。
prompt：促使
例：Japan's recession has prompted consumers to cut back on buying cars.
日本的经济衰退已促使消费者们削减购车花销。
[8] But unlike “Mindware,” most of the material in “Superforecasting” is new, and includes a compendium of best practices for prediction. The book describes the findings of the Good Judgment Project, an effort started by Tetlock and his collaborator (and wife), Barbara Mellers, in 2011, which was funded by an arm of the American intelligence community.
compendium：纲要；概略
[9] National security agencies have an obvious interest in Tetlock’s project. By one estimate, the United States has 20,000 intelligence analysts working full time to assess issues like the probability of an Israeli sneak attack on Iran in the next month, or the departure of Greece from the eurozone by the end of the year. That is nearly four times the number of physics faculty at American research universities. And so money spent on improving results must have seemed like a good investment.
[10] It was. The Good Judgment Project used the Internet to recruit 2,800 volunteers, ordinary people with an interest in current affairs — a retired computer programmer, a social services worker, a homemaker. Over four years, the researchers asked them to employ public news and information sources to estimate the probability that various events would occur, posing nearly 500 questions of the sort intelligence analysts must answer every day. The volunteers were also asked to reaffirm or adjust those probabilities daily, until a question “expired” at a pre-announced closing date.
homemaker：家庭主妇
employ：使用
例：The group will employ a mix of tactics to achieve its aim.
该团体将运用混合策略来实现其目标。
[11] Some of the volunteers performed strikingly better than the pack. Tetlock and Mellers studied their strategies, and what they learned about the thinking and methodology of these “superforecasters” is the heart of what is presented in the book.
strikingly：显著地；突出地
例：a strikingly handsome man.
一个异乎寻常地英俊的男人。
[12] The central lessons of “Superforecasting” can be distilled into a handful of directives. Base predictions on data and logic, and try to eliminate personal bias. Keep track of records so that you know how accurate you (and others) are. Think in terms of probabilities and recognize that everything is uncertain. Unpack a question into its component parts, distinguishing between what is known and unknown, and scrutinizing your assumptions.
distilled into：浓缩；吸取…的精华：
例：The writer managed to distil his ideas into one article.
作家努力把他的想法浓缩成一篇文章。
eliminate：消除；排除
例：You must eliminate this kind of services.
你必须消除这类型的服务。
[13] Those lessons are hardly surprising, though the accuracy that ordinary people regularly attained through their meticulous application did amaze me. Unfortunately, few of us seem to follow these principles in our daily lives. The prescriptions in both “Superforecasting” and “Mindware” should offer us all an opportunity to understand and react more intelligently to the confusing world around us.
句子
1. The six sections of “Mindware” offer a variety of perspectives on how we think
关于我们是如何思考的，“Mindware”的六个章节阐述了多种多样的观点。
2. So a book from Nisbett on this important subject is bound to be met with high expectations.
所以涉及这个重要的主题，当Nisbett写了一本相应的书籍时，自然会备受期待。
3. Nisbett writes clearly, and he takes his time with difficult concepts ranging from multiple regression to dialectical reasoning。
Nisbett写得很清晰，从"多重回归"到“辩证推理”，他阐述这些比较困难的概念时也非常有耐心。
4. He found that about 15 percent of events they claimed had little or no chance of happening did in fact happen
他发现在那些人声称过的“几乎”甚至“根本”不会发生的事情里，有15%其实真实发生了。
5. If I’d only followed CNBC’s advice, I’d have a million dollars today — provided I’d started with a hundred million dollars
如果我当时听了CNBC的建议，我现在应该有一百万美元了 - 前提是我当初是拿着一个亿开始的。
6. National security agencies have an obvious interest in Tetlock’s project
国家安全部分显然对Tetlock的计划很感兴趣。
7. Think in terms of probabilities and recognize that everything is uncertain
用概率的角度来思考，并且承认每件事情都是不确定的。
8. The prescriptions in both “Superforecasting” and “Mindware” should offer us all an opportunity to understand and react more intelligently to the confusing world around us.
“Superforecasting” 和 “Mindware” 里的方案可以让我们更好的理解这个复杂的世界，并且更机智地去应对它
单词
throughout：遍及，到处
fortify：增强，证实
nature：本质
groundbreaking：开创性的
influential：有影响力的; 有权势的
verdict：判断
overzealousness：过分热心的
hindsight：事后的聪明，马后炮
dialectical：辩证的
forecast：预言
resurface：再次出现
pundit：权威; 专家
prompt：促使
compendium：纲要；概略
homemaker：家庭主妇
employ：使用
strikingly：显著地；突出地
eliminate：消除；排除
词组
non sequitur：不合逻辑的推论
be bound to：必然...
take one's time：从容不迫；不著急
single out：挑出；挑选
distilled into：浓缩；吸取…的精华：
来源:
[1] A little after midnight, while writing this review, I took a break to get some beer from my local supermarket. As I stood in line the lights suddenly dimmed throughout the store. I must have looked puzzled. “We do that because less people come in this late,” the clerk explained. “There are fewer customers, so we need less light?” I asked. “Correct,” he said. His non sequitur had me leaving the store fortified with both a six-pack and the reinforced conviction that books on how to think should be required reading in high schools across the country. “Mindware: Tools for Smart Thinking,” by the psychologist Richard E. Nisbett, and “Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction,” by the psychologist Philip E. Tetlock and the journalist Dan Gardner, are two such books.
[2] The six sections of “Mindware” offer a variety of perspectives on how we think: the role of the unconscious in our judgments and decisions; the lessons of behavioral economics; the principles of probability and statistics; recommendations for how to test your ideas; and two sections on reasoning and the nature of knowledge.
[3] Nisbett is famous for his groundbreaking work in several areas of psychology; Malcolm Gladwell called him “the most influential thinker in my life.” And so a book from Nisbett on this important subject is bound to be met with high expectations.
[4] My verdict is mixed. If you are looking for a survey of the topics covered in the book’s six sections, this is a good one. You’ll learn about our overzealousness to see patterns, our hindsight bias, our loss aversion, the illusions of randomness and the importance of the scientific method, all in under 300 pages of text. But there isn’t much in “Mindware” that is new, and if you’ve read some of the many recent books on the unconscious, randomness, decision making and pop economics, then the material covered here will be familiar to you.
[5] Nisbett writes clearly, and he takes his time with difficult concepts ranging from multiple regression (which answers the question, Given many variables that contribute to some outcome, what is the effect of each?) to dialectical reasoning (a method of argument for resolving opposing views in order to establish truth). But the dry tone of the book, along with Nisbett’s practice of telling us what he is going to say and reiterating what he has just said, gives “Mindware” a textbook feel.
[6] Where “Mindware” addresses the issue of making sense of a complex world from many angles, “Superforecasting” focuses on one issue: how we form theories of what will happen in the future. “Superforecasting” is a sequel of sorts to Tetlock’s 2005 book “Expert Political Judgment,” in which he analyzed 82,361 predictions made by 284 experts in fields like political science, economics and journalism. He found that about 15 percent of events they claimed had little or no chance of happening did in fact happen, while about 27 percent of those labeled sure things didn’t. Tetlock concluded that the experts did little better than a “dart-throwing chimp.”
[7] The primate metaphor resurfaces in this new book. The authors single out Thomas Friedman of The New York Times for being an “exasperatingly evasive” forecaster, and they point to the inaccuracy of financial pundits at CNBC, whose performance prompted Jon Stewart to remark, “If I’d only followed CNBC’s advice, I’d have a million dollars today — provided I’d started with a hundred million dollars.”
[8] But unlike “Mindware,” most of the material in “Superforecasting” is new, and includes a compendium of best practices for prediction. The book describes the findings of the Good Judgment Project, an effort started by Tetlock and his collaborator (and wife), Barbara Mellers, in 2011, which was funded by an arm of the American intelligence community.
[9] National security agencies have an obvious interest in Tetlock’s project. By one estimate, the United States has 20,000 intelligence analysts working full time to assess issues like the probability of an Israeli sneak attack on Iran in the next month, or the departure of Greece from the eurozone by the end of the year. That is nearly four times the number of physics faculty at American research universities. And so money spent on improving results must have seemed like a good investment.
[10] It was. The Good Judgment Project used the Internet to recruit 2,800 volunteers, ordinary people with an interest in current affairs — a retired computer programmer, a social services worker, a homemaker. Over four years, the researchers asked them to employ public news and information sources to estimate the probability that various events would occur, posing nearly 500 questions of the sort intelligence analysts must answer every day. The volunteers were also asked to reaffirm or adjust those probabilities daily, until a question “expired” at a pre-announced closing date.
[11] Some of the volunteers performed strikingly better than the pack. Tetlock and Mellers studied their strategies, and what they learned about the thinking and methodology of these “superforecasters” is the heart of what is presented in the book.
[12] The central lessons of “Superforecasting” can be distilled into a handful of directives. Base predictions on data and logic, and try to eliminate personal bias. Keep track of records so that you know how accurate you (and others) are. Think in terms of probabilities and recognize that everything is uncertain. Unpack a question into its component parts, distinguishing between what is known and unknown, and scrutinizing your assumptions.
[13] Those lessons are hardly surprising, though the accuracy that ordinary people regularly attained through their meticulous application did amaze me. Unfortunately, few of us seem to follow these principles in our daily lives. The prescriptions in both “Superforecasting” and “Mindware” should offer us all an opportunity to understand and react more intelligently to the confusing world around us.