- 注释版
- 纯净版
来源:
[1 精读] You’re finally taking that much-deserved vacation in the Caribbean. You found the perfect resort online—at a great price—and impressed your friends with your ability to find such a cheap deal at such a beautiful place. You put down a deposit（定金）. Then you arrive and discover that those five star reviews were three years old. Today, the hotel is a rat trap. Your deposit is non-refundable （refund 退还，退款）.
well-deserved
/dɪ'zɜːvd/
adj. 应得的，理所应当,实至名归
deserved winners 实至名归的赢家
金句： Sometimes life doesn't want to give you something you want, not because you don't deserve it, but because you deserve more.
impress
/ɪm'pres/
vt. 留下印象 impress sb with sth
原文：impress your friends with your ability，
例句：impress your friends with your passion/ good manners.
impressive
adj 令人印象深刻的，令人钦佩的(褒义词)
赞扬时候用，impressive，替代excellent, good job, well done
it's quite impressive.
impression
n 印象
I don't wanna give the impression that I'm a bad guy.
deposit
/dɪ'pɑzɪt/
n.定金
n.押金，保证金；存款。
[2 略读] What will you do next? You have two options.
- Option 1: Cut your losses, walk away, and find the resort（度假村） of your dreams—somewhere else on the island.
- Option 2: Stick with the hotel you booked, because—after all—you’ve already made that deposit, and you don’t want to lose it. Besides, if you walk away now, your friends will know you made a rookie mistake—you were fooled by a pretty online photograph.
[3 略读] Surprisingly, according to some research, you are more likely to choose option 2. The outcome, almost certainly, would be an unpleasant vacation—exactly the opposite of you wanted in the first place. In other words, most people tend to choose the option in which they’ve already invested time, money, and/or personal pride—even when that option is clearly not likely to provide the best outcome. This type of decision is called a “sunk cost fallacy” based on a “sunk cost bias.”
fallacy
/ˈfaləsi/
n. 谬误（建立在错误或无效推论上的声明或论据），谬见
What Is a Sunk Cost?
[4 略读] A “sunk cost” is an investment that has already been made. It can be an investment of money, time, energy, love, or even personal pride. Sunk cost fallacy is the belief that anything you’ve already invested in deserves greater investment—even if it was a poor investment in the first place, and even if the investment is unlikely to lead to the desired outcome.
[5 略读] Sunk cost bias is a common problem for individuals—but it can also become a serious issue for businesses and government agencies. For example:
- You’re an entrepreneur or small business owner who’s already invested time, money, and personal pride in a product that performs poorly and is unlikely to ever break even（达到收支平衡，不赚不赔的点）, much less make a profit. So you plow（=invest） all your remaining assets into the product, rather than admitting that it was a poor choice in the first place, pulling the plug（终止项目）, and moving on.
- You’re the military arm of a national government, and you’ve already sunk millions—or billions—into a military plane that’s obsolete before it ever reaches a runway. So you recommit to more millions to finish the project, rather than looking at better options for military air power.
- You’re a corporate executive who championed（= support） an advertising campaign that failed miserably. So you tell your staff to spend more money to shore up（同上面的champion） that same campaign concept.
plow
/plau/
plough的一般美式拼法
v. 耕，犁，艰苦前进
【记】p- people, low - 低，人趴得很低 - 面朝黄土背朝天耕地，艰难的样子
I plowed my way through the crowd.
v.把(利润)再投资
The money was all ploughed back into the company.
plough sth into sth 大量投资于
The government has ploughed more than $20 billion into building new schools.
pulling the plug
词组：pull the plug on sth 拔掉插头=不供电=终止当前的资金或支持等投入, 要终止做某事，放弃。
例句：The company pulled the plug on the project.
终止，突然中断
The government pulled the plug on spending.
shore up
/ʃɔː/
v. 支撑，稳住
词组：shore up 补强，增援；加固
在帆船航行时代，海面上的船只如果遭到风暴或因其他原因而损坏，或者是淡水、粮食等资源短缺，就得靠岸进行补给或修复，这个“补给修复”的动作就是shore up。引申为各种形式的“补强、增援”。
例句：The tax cuts are supposed to shore up the economy.
What’s So Bad About Sunk Cost Bias?
[6 略读] Most people are biased（有偏见） toward investments they’ve already made. They’ve put so much into a project, product, relationship, or plan of action that they don’t want to “waste” effort.
[7 略读] Under some circumstances, this makes sense—especially when the investment is important, and clear-eyed observation indicates that more time or resources could make the difference between failure and success. No one, for example, would recommend giving up on a marriage at the first sign of trouble—or dumping（抛弃） a major new business project because of a small setback(=difficulty).
Clear-eyed
adj. 头脑清晰的；
setback
/'setbæk/
n.挫折；阻碍
金句：Life's greatest setbacks reveal life's biggest opportunities.
[8] But what happens if you’ve already given that relationship, product, or project all the time and resources it should need for success—and it’s still failing? Logic, along with the laws of probability, tells you to walk away.
[9 精读] Yet many people and businesses stick with their poor choices because they believe so strongly that they should protect their investment at any cost. This, as Robert Leahy, a psychiatrist and Director of the American Institute for Cognitive Therapy in New York says, is a poor idea.(长难句，主语和谓语间隔很远) As Leahy explains in an article in Forbes: “A model of good decision-making is always based on future utility or future payoff.”
Why It Makes Sense to Stop Throwing Good Money After Bad (And Why We Do It Anyway)
[10 略读] Imagine flipping a coin（抛硬币） and betting that it will come up heads. It comes up tails. So you double your bet—because it’s more likely to come up heads next time, right? What if it comes up tails five times in row? In that case, it’s much more likely to come up heads the sixth time, right?
[11 略读] Actually, according to the laws of probability, the coin is no more likely to come up heads just because it came up tails last time. There is always a 50% chance that it will come up heads. But most of us find this mathematical reality very difficult to accept. It just feels wrong. The result of betting on a sunk cost fallacy in this case? If you kept doubling your bet every time you lost the coin toss, you’d be subjecting yourself to（受制于） a 50% failure rate—over and over again.
[12 略读] Looking at it that way, it seems foolish to keep throwing good money after bad. Why keep on making the same bet with the same high odds of losing? But psychologically we are programmed to do just that. As a result, we:
- Increase our investment in failing products, programs, and people;
- Refuse to cut our losses when we can see that the outcome will be even greater loss;
- See ourselves as “stuck with” the consequences of poor decisions, and choose not to make smarter decisions for the future.
be programmed to do
程序被设定为做....指天生就是做.....专门是....
Baymax is programmed to do a lot of things. Wrapping presents is not one of them.
[13 精读] This can be devastating(毁灭性的) for people in abusive（虐待，暴力） relationships, soul-numbing jobs(令人灵魂麻木的工作), money pit homes（金钱无底洞般的房子）, or dead-end lifestyles. It can also be devastating, of course, for businesses.
[14 略读] Why do people fall into the trap of the sunk cost fallacy? There are many reasons.
- We don’t understand that past investments need not affect future investments.
- We are “programmed” to believe that grit and tenacity are more important than common sense.
- We believe that if we stick with our commitments our luck will change.
- We are often too proud to admit that we were wrong.
- We have a built-in bias（内嵌，与生俱来的） toward those decisions that we personally make.
- We are, as a species, extremely uncomfortable with the idea of letting go of something we already have in our hands—even when there is a better alternative（n. 替代选择） available.
- We tend to forget why we made initial investments—and mistakenly tell ourselves that the investment itself is the point.
长难句分析：
We are, as a species, extremely uncomfortable with the idea of letting go of something we already have in our hands —even when there is a better alternative available.
插入语：as a species
主干：We are uncomfortable with the idea.
什么样的idea? the idea of letting go of something (we already have in our hands)
作为一个物种，我们（与生俱来）就不喜欢失去我们手里已经抓住的东西—即使有更好的选择。
How Does the Sunk Cost Fallacy Affect Businesses?
[15 略读] Perhaps the most famous example of the impact of sunk cost fallacy on business is aptly nicknamed “The Concorde Fallacy.” The Concorde was a supersonic (faster-than-sound) airplane designed for elite travelers, funded by the British and French governments.
[16 略读] Even before the plane was completed, it was clear that it would not be a financial success. Despite this knowledge, the two governments continued to shell out money（spend much money） to fund the project’s completion. Not surprisingly, the project launched, fizzled（=fail）, and quickly died—along with any hope of recouping(收回) the huge amount of money invested.
[17 略读] Why would usually-rational people decide to continue investing in a project that has essentially failed before it even started? The decision to support an investment at any cost is largely psychological rather than rational. Here’s why:
- We tend to think positively about people and projects we ourselves have initiated （= begin）—even when they are not working out.
- We tend to link our sense of self-worth to the *initiatives *(=programs) we launch or support, even when they don’t succeed.
- We are afraid to “lose face” as individuals or organizations by admitting to mistakes.
- We value tenacity and grit in ourselves and our employees, even when its outcome is continued financial loss.
*shell out money*
/ʃel/
v.p. shell out 花钱，支付
例句： He had to shell out a lot of money for the date.
他不得不为这次约会付一大笔钱。从贝壳里挤出钱来支付
How can we avoid the sunk loss fallacy in business?
[18 精读] There are some simple strategies that can help. Specifically:
- Recognize a sunk cost when you see one. Every investment you’ve already made is money spent. No matter what choice you make today, you won’t be able to recover the sunk cost. So... what’s the best move you can make for the future?
- Remember that “I’ve already put so much into this” is not a valid(正确有效的，符合逻辑的) reason for sticking with an expensive enterprise that isn’t working out.
- Separate your personal pride from your business decisions. Would you look stupid walking away from that pet project（面子工程，个人偏好的项目） you’ve put so much into? Possibly. But you’d look even worse in bankruptcy proceedings!
- Include multiple decision makers in the decision-making process, so that the person who made the initial decision to invest is not the only person involved with thinking about future investment.
- Consider the options available to you if you choose not to re-invest. Could you make better use of your time and money?
pet project
面子工程,个人偏爱的项目 A project, activity or goal pursued as a personal favorite, rather than because it is generally accepted as necessary or important.
Don't bother him about his pet project. You'll never tear him away from it.
来源:
[1 精读] You’re finally taking that much-deserved vacation in the Caribbean. You found the perfect resort online—at a great price—and impressed your friends with your ability to find such a cheap deal at such a beautiful place. You put down a deposit（定金）. Then you arrive and discover that those five star reviews were three years old. Today, the hotel is a rat trap. Your deposit is non-refundable （refund 退还，退款）.
[2 略读] What will you do next? You have two options.
- Option 1: Cut your losses, walk away, and find the resort（度假村） of your dreams—somewhere else on the island.
- Option 2: Stick with the hotel you booked, because—after all—you’ve already made that deposit, and you don’t want to lose it. Besides, if you walk away now, your friends will know you made a rookie mistake—you were fooled by a pretty online photograph.
[3 略读] Surprisingly, according to some research, you are more likely to choose option 2. The outcome, almost certainly, would be an unpleasant vacation—exactly the opposite of you wanted in the first place. In other words, most people tend to choose the option in which they’ve already invested time, money, and/or personal pride—even when that option is clearly not likely to provide the best outcome. This type of decision is called a “sunk cost fallacy” based on a “sunk cost bias.”
What Is a Sunk Cost?
[4 略读] A “sunk cost” is an investment that has already been made. It can be an investment of money, time, energy, love, or even personal pride. Sunk cost fallacy is the belief that anything you’ve already invested in deserves greater investment—even if it was a poor investment in the first place, and even if the investment is unlikely to lead to the desired outcome.
[5 略读] Sunk cost bias is a common problem for individuals—but it can also become a serious issue for businesses and government agencies. For example:
- You’re an entrepreneur or small business owner who’s already invested time, money, and personal pride in a product that performs poorly and is unlikely to ever break even（达到收支平衡，不赚不赔的点）, much less make a profit. So you plow all your remaining assets into the product, rather than admitting that it was a poor choice in the first place, pulling the plug, and moving on.
- You’re the military arm of a national government, and you’ve already sunk millions—or billions—into a military plane that’s obsolete before it ever reaches a runway. So you recommit to more millions to finish the project, rather than looking at better options for military air power.
- You’re a corporate executive who championed（= support） an advertising campaign that failed miserably. So you tell your staff to spend more money to shore up that same campaign concept.
What’s So Bad About Sunk Cost Bias?
[6 略读] Most people are biased toward investments they’ve already made. They’ve put so much into a project, product, relationship, or plan of action that they don’t want to “waste” effort.
[7 略读] Under some circumstances, this makes sense—especially when the investment is important, and clear-eyed observation indicates that more time or resources could make the difference between failure and success. No one, for example, would recommend giving up on a marriage at the first sign of trouble—or dumping a major new business project because of a small setback(=difficulty).
[8] But what happens if you’ve already given that relationship, product, or project all the time and resources it should need for success—and it’s still failing? Logic, along with the laws of probability, tells you to walk away.
[9 精读] Yet many people and businesses stick with their poor choices because they believe so strongly that they should protect their investment at any cost. This, as Robert Leahy, a psychiatrist and Director of the American Institute for Cognitive Therapy in New York says, is a poor idea.(长难句，主语和谓语间隔很远) As Leahy explains in an article in Forbes: “A model of good decision-making is always based on future utility or future payoff.”
Why It Makes Sense to Stop Throwing Good Money After Bad (And Why We Do It Anyway)
[10 略读] Imagine flipping a coin（抛硬币） and betting that it will come up heads. It comes up tails. So you double your bet—because it’s more likely to come up heads next time, right? What if it comes up tails five times in row? In that case, it’s much more likely to come up heads the sixth time, right?
[11 略读] Actually, according to the laws of probability, the coin is no more likely to come up heads just because it came up tails last time. There is always a 50% chance that it will come up heads. But most of us find this mathematical reality very difficult to accept. It just feels wrong. The result of betting on a sunk cost fallacy in this case? If you kept doubling your bet every time you lost the coin toss, you’d be subjecting yourself to a 50% failure rate—over and over again.
[12 略读] Looking at it that way, it seems foolish to keep throwing good money after bad. Why keep on making the same bet with the same high odds of losing? But psychologically we are programmed to do just that. As a result, we:
- Increase our investment in failing products, programs, and people;
- Refuse to cut our losses when we can see that the outcome will be even greater loss;
- See ourselves as “stuck with” the consequences of poor decisions, and choose not to make smarter decisions for the future.
[13 精读] This can be devastating(毁灭性的) for people in abusive（虐待，暴力） relationships, soul-numbing jobs, money pit homes, or dead-end lifestyles. It can also be devastating, of course, for businesses.
[14 略读] Why do people fall into the trap of the sunk cost fallacy? There are many reasons.
- We don’t understand that past investments need not affect future investments.
- We are “programmed” to believe that grit and tenacity are more important than common sense.
- We believe that if we stick with our commitments our luck will change.
- We are often too proud to admit that we were wrong.
- We have a built-in bias toward those decisions that we personally make.
- We are, as a species, extremely uncomfortable with the idea of letting go of something we already have in our hands—even when there is a better alternative（n. 替代选择） available.
- We tend to forget why we made initial investments—and mistakenly tell ourselves that the investment itself is the point.
How Does the Sunk Cost Fallacy Affect Businesses?
[15 略读] Perhaps the most famous example of the impact of sunk cost fallacy on business is aptly nicknamed “The Concorde Fallacy.” The Concorde was a supersonic (faster-than-sound) airplane designed for elite travelers, funded by the British and French governments.
[16 略读] Even before the plane was completed, it was clear that it would not be a financial success. Despite this knowledge, the two governments continued to shell out money to fund the project’s completion. Not surprisingly, the project launched, fizzled（=fail）, and quickly died—along with any hope of recouping(收回) the huge amount of money invested.
[17 略读] Why would usually-rational people decide to continue investing in a project that has essentially failed before it even started? The decision to support an investment at any cost is largely psychological rather than rational. Here’s why:
- We tend to think positively about people and projects we ourselves have initiated （= begin）—even when they are not working out.
- We tend to link our sense of self-worth to the *initiatives *(=programs) we launch or support, even when they don’t succeed.
- We are afraid to “lose face” as individuals or organizations by admitting to mistakes.
- We value tenacity and grit in ourselves and our employees, even when its outcome is continued financial loss.
How can we avoid the sunk loss fallacy in business?
[18 精读] There are some simple strategies that can help. Specifically:
- Recognize a sunk cost when you see one. Every investment you’ve already made is money spent. No matter what choice you make today, you won’t be able to recover the sunk cost. So... what’s the best move you can make for the future?
- Remember that “I’ve already put so much into this” is not a valid reason for sticking with an expensive enterprise that isn’t working out.
- Separate your personal pride from your business decisions. Would you look stupid walking away from that pet project（面子工程，个人偏好的项目） you’ve put so much into? Possibly. But you’d look even worse in bankruptcy proceedings!
- Include multiple decision makers in the decision-making process, so that the person who made the initial decision to invest is not the only person involved with thinking about future investment.
- Consider the options available to you if you choose not to re-invest. Could you make better use of your time and money?