00:13
A few years ago, I broke into my own house. I had just driven home, it was around midnight in the dead of Montreal winter, I had been visiting my friend, Jeff, across town, and the thermometer on the front porch read minus 40 degrees -- and don't bother asking if that's Celsius or Fahrenheit, minus 40 is where the two scales meet -- it was very cold. And as I stood on the front porch fumbling in my pockets, I found I didn't have my keys. In fact, I could see them through the window, lying on the dining room table where I had left them. So I quickly ran around and tried all the other doors and windows, and they were locked tight. I thought about calling a locksmith -- at least I had my cellphone, but at midnight, it could take a while for a locksmith to show up, and it was cold. I couldn't go back to my friend Jeff's house for the night because I had an early flight to Europe the next morning, and I needed to get my passport and my suitcase.

01:08
So, desperate and freezing cold, I found a large rock and I broke through the basement window, cleared out the shards of glass, I crawled through, I found a piece of cardboard and taped it up over the opening, figuring that in the morning, on the way to the airport, I could call my contractor and ask him to fix it. This was going to be expensive, but probably no more expensive than a middle-of-the-night locksmith, so I figured, under the circumstances, I was coming out even.

01:36
Now, I'm a neuroscientist by training and I know a little bit about how the brain performs under stress. It releases cortisol that raises your heart rate, it modulates adrenaline levels and it clouds your thinking. So the next morning, when I woke up on too little sleep, worrying about the hole in the window, and a mental note that I had to call my contractor, and the freezing temperatures, and the meetings I had upcoming in Europe, and, you know, with all the cortisol in my brain, my thinking was cloudy, but I didn't know it was cloudy because my thinking was cloudy.

02:13
(Laughter)

02:15
And it wasn't until I got to the airport check-in counter, that I realized I didn't have my passport.

02:20
(Laughter)

02:22
So I raced home in the snow and ice, 40 minutes, got my passport, raced back to the airport, I made it just in time, but they had given away my seat to someone else, so I got stuck in the back of the plane, next to the bathrooms, in a seat that wouldn't recline, on an eight-hour flight. Well, I had a lot of time to think during those eight hours and no sleep.

02:43
(Laughter)

02:44
And I started wondering, are there things that I can do, systems that I can put into place, that will prevent bad things from happening? Or at least if bad things happen, will minimize the likelihood of it being a total catastrophe. So I started thinking about that, but my thoughts didn't crystallize until about a month later. I was having dinner with my colleague, Danny Kahneman, the Nobel Prize winner, and I somewhat embarrassedly told him about having broken my window, and, you know, forgotten my passport, and Danny shared with me that he'd been practicing something called prospective hindsight.

03:19
(Laughter)

03:20
It's something that he had gotten from the psychologist Gary Klein, who had written about it a few years before, also called the pre-mortem. Now, you all know what the postmortem is. Whenever there's a disaster, a team of experts come in and they try to figure out what went wrong, right? Well, in the pre-mortem, Danny explained, you look ahead and you try to figure out all the things that could go wrong, and then you try to figure out what you can do to prevent those things from happening, or to minimize the damage.

03:48
So what I want to talk to you about today are some of the things we can do in the form of a pre-mortem. Some of them are obvious, some of them are not so obvious. I'll start with the obvious ones.

03:59
Around the home, designate a place for things that are easily lost. Now, this sounds like common sense, and it is, but there's a lot of science to back this up, based on the way our spatial memory works. There's a structure in the brain called the hippocampus, that evolved over tens of thousands of years, to keep track of the locations of important things -- where the well is, where fish can be found, that stand of fruit trees, where the friendly and enemy tribes live. The hippocampus is the part of the brain that in London taxicab drivers becomes enlarged. It's the part of the brain that allows squirrels to find their nuts. And if you're wondering, somebody actually did the experiment where they cut off the olfactory sense of the squirrels, and they could still find their nuts. They weren't using smell, they were using the hippocampus, this exquisitely evolved mechanism in the brain for finding things. But it's really good for things that don't move around much, not so good for things that move around. So this is why we lose car keys and reading glasses and passports. So in the home, designate a spot for your keys -- a hook by the door, maybe a decorative bowl. For your passport, a particular drawer. For your reading glasses, a particular table. If you designate a spot and you're scrupulous about it, your things will always be there when you look for them.

05:24
What about travel? Take a cell phone picture of your credit cards, your driver's license, your passport, mail it to yourself so it's in the cloud. If these things are lost or stolen, you can facilitate replacement.

05:37
Now these are some rather obvious things. Remember, when you're under stress, the brain releases cortisol. Cortisol is toxic, and it causes cloudy thinking. So part of the practice of the pre-mortem is to recognize that under stress you're not going to be at your best, and you should put systems in place.

05:55
And there's perhaps no more stressful a situation than when you're confronted with a medical decision to make. And at some point, all of us are going to be in that position, where we have to make a very important decision about the future of our medical care or that of a loved one, to help them with a decision.

06:12
And so I want to talk about that. And I'm going to talk about a very particular medical condition. But this stands as a proxy for all kinds of medical decision-making, and indeed for financial decision-making, and social decision-making -- any kind of decision you have to make that would benefit from a rational assessment of the facts.

06:31
So suppose you go to your doctor and the doctor says, "I just got your lab work back, your cholesterol's a little high." Now, you all know that high cholesterol is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, heart attack, stroke. And so you're thinking having high cholesterol isn't the best thing, and so the doctor says, "You know, I'd like to give you a drug that will help you lower your cholesterol, a statin." And you've probably heard of statins, you know that they're among the most widely prescribed drugs in the world today, you probably even know people who take them. And so you're thinking, "Yeah! Give me the statin."

07:07
But there's a question you should ask at this point, a statistic you should ask for that most doctors don't like talking about, and pharmaceutical companies like talking about even less. It's for the number needed to treat. Now, what is this, the NNT? It's the number of people that need to take a drug or undergo a surgery or any medical procedure before one person is helped. And you're thinking, what kind of crazy statistic is that? The number should be one. My doctor wouldn't prescribe something to me if it's not going to help. But actually, medical practice doesn't work that way. And it's not the doctor's fault, if it's anybody's fault, it's the fault of scientists like me. We haven't figured out the underlying mechanisms well enough. But GlaxoSmithKline estimates that 90 percent of the drugs work in only 30 to 50 percent of the people. So the number needed to treat for the most widely prescribed statin, what do you suppose it is? How many people have to take it before one person is helped? 300. This is according to research by research practitioners Jerome Groopman and Pamela Hartzband, independently confirmed by Bloomberg.com. I ran through the numbers myself. 300 people have to take the drug for a year before one heart attack, stroke or other adverse event is prevented.

08:24
Now you're probably thinking, "Well, OK, one in 300 chance of lowering my cholesterol. Why not, doc? Give me the prescription anyway." But you should ask at this point for another statistic, and that is, "Tell me about the side effects." Right? So for this particular drug, the side effects occur in five percent of the patients. And they include terrible things -- debilitating muscle and joint pain, gastrointestinal distress -- but now you're thinking, "Five percent, not very likely it's going to happen to me, I'll still take the drug." But wait a minute. Remember under stress you're not thinking clearly. So think about how you're going to work through this ahead of time, so you don't have to manufacture the chain of reasoning on the spot. 300 people take the drug, right? One person's helped, five percent of those 300 have side effects, that's 15 people. You're 15 times more likely to be harmed by the drug than you are to be helped by the drug.

09:16
Now, I'm not saying whether you should take the statin or not. I'm just saying you should have this conversation with your doctor. Medical ethics requires it, it's part of the principle of informed consent. You have the right to have access to this kind of information to begin the conversation about whether you want to take the risks or not.

09:33
Now you might be thinking I've pulled this number out of the air for shock value, but in fact it's rather typical, this number needed to treat. For the most widely performed surgery on men over the age of 50, removal of the prostate for cancer, the number needed to treat is 49. That's right, 49 surgeries are done for every one person who's helped. And the side effects in that case occur in 50 percent of the patients. They include impotence, erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence, rectal tearing, fecal incontinence. And if you're lucky, and you're one of the 50 percent who has these, they'll only last for a year or two.

10:12
So the idea of the pre-mortem is to think ahead of time to the questions that you might be able to ask that will push the conversation forward. You don't want to have to manufacture all of this on the spot. And you also want to think about things like quality of life. Because you have a choice oftentimes, do you I want a shorter life that's pain-free, or a longer life that might have a great deal of pain towards the end? These are things to talk about and think about now, with your family and your loved ones. You might change your mind in the heat of the moment, but at least you're practiced with this kind of thinking.

10:45
Remember, our brain under stress releases cortisol, and one of the things that happens at that moment is a whole bunch on systems shut down. There's an evolutionary reason for this. Face-to-face with a predator, you don't need your digestive system, or your libido, or your immune system, because if you're body is expending metabolism on those things and you don't react quickly, you might become the lion's lunch, and then none of those things matter. Unfortunately, one of the things that goes out the window during those times of stress is rational, logical thinking, as Danny Kahneman and his colleagues have shown. So we need to train ourselves to think ahead to these kinds of situations.

11:27
I think the important point here is recognizing that all of us are flawed. We all are going to fail now and then. The idea is to think ahead to what those failures might be, to put systems in place that will help minimize the damage, or to prevent the bad things from happening in the first place.

11:48
Getting back to that snowy night in Montreal, when I got back from my trip, I had my contractor install a combination lock next to the door, with a key to the front door in it, an easy to remember combination. And I have to admit, I still have piles of mail that haven't been sorted, and piles of emails that I haven't gone through. So I'm not completely organized, but I see organization as a gradual process, and I'm getting there.

12:13
Thank you very much.

12:14
(Applause)

00:13
幾年前，我闖入了自己的家返奉。 我開車回到家芽偏， 在蒙特利爾的寒冬， 大約午夜時分膀哲， 我開車從城鎮(zhèn)一邊到另一邊等太， 去看望我的朋友Jeff, 門廊上的溫度計(jì)顯示零下40度—— 不需要知道是攝氏度還是華氏度, 到了零下40度缩抡， 兩個溫度顯示都一樣—— 天氣非常冷包颁。 當(dāng)我站在門廊娩嚼，摸索著我的口袋， 發(fā)現(xiàn)找不到鑰匙佃迄。 實(shí)際上呵俏，我透過窗戶能看到我的鑰匙滔灶， 我把它們留在了餐桌上录平。 我趕緊圍著房子轉(zhuǎn)， 找能進(jìn)去的門和窗戶动猬， 而它們都被鎖緊了赁咙。 我想到打電話給鎖匠燃逻， 至少我還有手機(jī)伯襟， 但在午夜， 鎖匠要過來可能需要一段時間叛赚， 并且天氣真的很冷俺附。 當(dāng)晚我又不能回朋友Jeff的家， 因?yàn)榈诙煳乙绨鄼C(jī)到歐洲步鉴， 必須要進(jìn)屋里拿護(hù)照和行李璃哟。

01:08
因此随闪，在絕望和寒冷中铐伴， 我找到一塊大石頭， 打破了地下室的窗戶畜吊， 清理了玻璃碎片后定拟， 我爬進(jìn)屋里逗嫡， 找到了一塊硬紙板驱证，用膠帶 把它封貼在打破的窗戶上抹锄， 我想著早晨去機(jī)場的路上， 可以打電話給承包商获高， 請他來修理窗戶念秧。 修理費(fèi)會很昂貴布疼， 但不會比在午夜時 找鎖匠來開鎖更貴， 所以我覺得漩绵，在這種情況下 即使打破了窗戶肛炮，也還劃得來铸董。

01:36
我是一個職業(yè)的神經(jīng)科學(xué)家粟害， 我大概知道在壓力下 大腦是如何工作的颤芬。 大腦會釋放皮質(zhì)醇引起你的心率加速站蝠， 它調(diào)節(jié)你的腎上腺素水平 并阻礙你的思維能力菱魔。 第二天早晨， 我醒來的時候嚴(yán)重睡眠不足聚蝶， 還在擔(dān)心窗戶上打破的洞碘勉， 心里想著必須打電話給承包商验靡， 還有雏节，天氣非常寒冷钩乍， 在歐洲有個會要開件蚕， 還有产禾，因?yàn)槲掖竽X釋放的皮質(zhì)醇亚情， 我的思維變得混沌楞件， 但我沒覺察到它很混沌裳瘪， 因?yàn)槲业乃季S很混沌彭羹。

02:13
（笑聲）

02:15
直到我在登機(jī)手續(xù)辦理柜臺時派殷， 才意識到我忘了帶護(hù)照。

02:20
（笑聲）

02:22
于是拓轻，我在冰天雪地中 用了40分鐘趕回家扶叉， 拿了護(hù)照后枣氧，又趕回機(jī)場泳叠， 剛好趕上了飛機(jī)， 但他們已把我的座位給了別人危纫， 我不得不坐在飛機(jī)最后一排宗挥， 緊挨著洗手間， 在八個小時的飛行中种蝶， 我的座椅都不能往后傾契耿。 于是我就有了很多時間去思考， 因?yàn)槲以诎诵r中無法睡覺螃征。

02:43
（笑聲）

02:44
我開始想搪桂，我能做些什么， 有什么切實(shí)可行的方法踢械， 可以防止不好的事發(fā)生呢酗电？ 或者至少， 就算不好的事情真的會發(fā)生内列， 也能把損失降到最小撵术。 所以，我開始思考這個問題话瞧， 但我沒有想出來嫩与， 直到一個月后， 我和同事交排，也是諾貝爾獎獲得者 Danny Kahneman去吃晚餐划滋， 我有點(diǎn)尷尬地告訴他， 我打破窗戶爬進(jìn)屋里埃篓， 還有忘記拿護(hù)照的事处坪， 而Danny和我分享了 他一直在練習(xí)的 稱為”預(yù)測后見之明“的東西。

03:19
（笑聲）

03:20
這是他從心理學(xué)家Gary Klein 那里學(xué)到的都许。 Gary 前幾年已經(jīng)寫了這個理論稻薇， 也稱為"事前剖析"。 你們都知道事后剖析是什么意思胶征。 每當(dāng)有災(zāi)難， 一個專家小組就會前去調(diào)查桨仿， 嘗試找出導(dǎo)致災(zāi)難的原因睛低，對吧 ？ 而Danny解釋服傍，在事前剖析中钱雷， 你要預(yù)測， 嘗試想出可能出錯的所有事情吹零， 然后你要嘗試可能的方法來 防止這些錯誤發(fā)生罩抗， 或?qū)p失降到最小。

03:48
所以灿椅，今天我想和你們談?wù)勱P(guān)于 在事前剖析中套蒂， 我們能做的一些事情。 有些方式是顯而易見的茫蛹， 而有些則不那么明顯操刀。 我先談顯而易見的方式。

03:59
在家里婴洼，指定一個地方骨坑， 放容易丟失的東西。 這聽起來就像是常識柬采，也的確是欢唾， 但這符合我們空間記憶的工作原理且警， 有很多科學(xué)依據(jù)支持這一點(diǎn)。 在我們大腦里礁遣， 有一個叫海馬體的結(jié)構(gòu)斑芜， 已經(jīng)進(jìn)化超過數(shù)萬年了， 它可以追蹤重要東西的位置—— 例如亡脸，水井的位置押搪， 能夠發(fā)現(xiàn)魚的地方， 果樹的位置浅碾， 以及友好物種和敵對物種 分別居住在哪里大州。 海馬體是大腦的一部分， 倫敦出租車司機(jī)的 海馬體結(jié)構(gòu)通常比常人要大垂谢。 松鼠能找到堅(jiān)果厦画， 也要?dú)w功于它們大腦的海馬體。 你們可能對這點(diǎn)感到疑惑， 但有人的確做了一個實(shí)驗(yàn)。 他們切掉了松鼠的嗅覺器官串稀， 松鼠仍然能找到它們的堅(jiān)果帅矗。 它們不是用嗅覺， 而是用大腦的海馬體惧蛹， 這個進(jìn)化完美的大腦機(jī)制 是用來找東西的。 但只是對找固定的東西比較有效， 找會移動的東西卻不是很管用淳地。 這就是為什么我們會常常找不到 車鑰匙，老花鏡和護(hù)照帅容。 所以颇象，在家里指定一個 地點(diǎn)存放你的鑰匙—— 門上的掛鉤，或是一個裝飾碗并徘。 在一個特定的抽屜存放你的護(hù)照遣钳。 你的老花鏡要放在特定的桌子上。 如果你指定了特定的地方麦乞， 并且一絲不茍地做這些事蕴茴， 當(dāng)你尋找它們時， 這些東西總是會在那里路幸。

05:24
關(guān)于旅行呢荐开？ 用手機(jī)拍下你信用卡的照片， 還有你的駕照和護(hù)照简肴， 把這些照片發(fā)到你的電子郵箱晃听， 儲存在數(shù)據(jù)云端。 如果一旦丟失或被盜了， 你可以很方便地用電子件代替它們能扒。

05:37
這些是一些顯而易見的 事前剖析方法佣渴。 記住，當(dāng)你有壓力時初斑， 大腦會釋放皮質(zhì)醇辛润。 皮質(zhì)醇是有毒的， 它會導(dǎo)致思維不清晰见秤。 所以砂竖，做事前剖析的練習(xí)， 是要認(rèn)識到在壓力下鹃答， 你不是在最佳狀態(tài)乎澄， 你還應(yīng)該把事情做到井然有序。

05:55
不過也許沒有什么 比你要做醫(yī)療決策 更緊張的情況了测摔。 有時置济，我們都會經(jīng)歷這種事情， 我們必須要做出一個很重要的決策锋八， 為我們自己或自己愛的人 做醫(yī)療決策浙于。

06:12
所以，我想談?wù)勥@個話題挟纱。 我要說一個非常特殊的醫(yī)療情況羞酗。 但它代表了各種決策：醫(yī)療決策， 當(dāng)然還有財(cái)政決策和社交決策—— 任何你必須做的決策紊服， 可以讓你從理性的事實(shí)評估中受益整慎。

06:31
假設(shè)你去看醫(yī)生，而醫(yī)生說围苫， “我剛拿到你驗(yàn)血結(jié)果， 你的膽固醇有點(diǎn)高撤师〖粮” 你們都知道，膽固醇高 會增加患心血管疾病剃盾， 心臟病和中風(fēng)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)腺占。 所以，你會想 高膽固醇不是一件好事痒谴， 那么醫(yī)生會說：“我給你開點(diǎn)藥衰伯， 幫助你降低膽固醇， 他汀類藥就可以积蔚∫饩ǎ” 你可能已經(jīng)聽說過他汀類藥物， 現(xiàn)如今是醫(yī)生開的 最多的處方藥之一。 你甚至可能認(rèn)識服用這藥的人怎顾。 于是你想读慎，“好吧，給我他汀類藥槐雾∝参” 但這個時候，你必須問一個問題募强，

07:12
一個許多醫(yī)生不愿談?wù)摚?制藥公司更不喜歡談?wù)摰降?一個統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字株灸。 這個統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字就是，治療所需人數(shù)擎值。 這是什么意思呢慌烧， 治療所需人數(shù)（NNT）？ 它是指多少人服用了某種藥幅恋， 或接收了手術(shù)或其他任何治療方式杏死， 才會有1人收益。 你心說捆交， 這是哪門子統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字淑翼？ 這數(shù)字應(yīng)該是1啊， 如果這藥對我沒有幫助品追， 那醫(yī)生就不會開給我玄括。 但實(shí)際上， 醫(yī)療實(shí)踐不是這樣運(yùn)行的肉瓦。 這不是醫(yī)生的錯遭京， 如果是某些人的錯， 那就是像我一樣的科學(xué)家的錯泞莉。 我們還沒有想出足夠好的運(yùn)作機(jī)制哪雕。 但據(jù)葛蘭素史克制藥公司 （Glaxo Smith Kline）估計(jì)， 90%的藥品只對30%到50%的人有用鲫趁。 所以斯嚎，這種最廣泛的處方藥的 治療所需人數(shù)， 你們猜是多少挨厚？ 多少人要服用它 才會出現(xiàn)一個受益的人堡僻？ 300。 這是根據(jù)研究工作者 Jerome Groopman 和 Pamela Hartzband 做的研究得出的數(shù)據(jù)疫剃， 這項(xiàng)研究由Bloomberg.com 權(quán)威網(wǎng)站獨(dú)立證實(shí)過钉疫。 我自己想了一下這個數(shù)字。 必須有300人服用此藥一年巢价， 才能預(yù)防一起心臟病牲阁， 中風(fēng)或其他疾病固阁。 現(xiàn)在你可能在想，

08:25
“好吧咨油，還有300分之1的機(jī)會 可以降低我的膽固醇您炉。 為什么不服用呢？醫(yī)生役电， 給我開這個藥赚爵。” 但是你應(yīng)該問醫(yī)生法瑟， 有關(guān)這藥的另一個統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字冀膝， 那就是，”告訴我這藥的副作用霎挟∥哑剩” 對吧？ 那么針對這種藥酥夭， 副作用會發(fā)生在5%的患者身上赐纱。 這些副作用包括一些可怕的情況—— 肌無力，關(guān)節(jié)疼痛和腸胃不適 —— 但你可能覺得：“ 才5%的比例熬北， 不太可能發(fā)生在我身上疙描， 我還是會服用它⊙纫” 但是起胰，請等等。 記住在壓力下巫延，你可能 思維混亂效五，不能考慮清楚。 所以炉峰，要提前思考一下你該如何做畏妖， 這樣你就不用事到臨頭時 再去進(jìn)行一連串的推理了。 300人要服用這藥疼阔， 才會有一個人受益瓜客，對吧？ 300人中5%的人會 受藥物副作用的影響竿开， 也就是15人。 你受藥物副作用傷害的可能性 是你受益于藥物的15倍玻熙。 我并不是想表明 你該不該服用他汀類藥物否彩。

09:19
我只是說，你應(yīng)該咨詢你的醫(yī)生嗦随。 醫(yī)德要求我們這樣做列荔， 這是知情同意原則的一部分敬尺。 你有權(quán)力要求知道這類信息， 有權(quán)和醫(yī)生談你是否 愿意承擔(dān)這樣的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)贴浙。 現(xiàn)在你可能會想

09:34
我為了制造震撼的效果 憑空捏造了這個數(shù)字砂吞， 但實(shí)際上，這個治療所需人數(shù) 是相當(dāng)具有代表性的崎溃。 對于50歲以上的男性蜻直， 做的最多的手術(shù)是為治療 前列腺癌而切除前列腺， 治療所需人數(shù)是49袁串。 是的概而，49個患者做了手術(shù) 才會出現(xiàn)一個受益的人。 而這種情況手術(shù)的副作用 會發(fā)生在50%的患者身上囱修。 這些副作用包括陽痿赎瑰， 勃起功能障礙， 尿失禁破镰，直腸撕裂餐曼， 大便失禁。 如果你“有幸”成為了50% 受副作用影響的人中的一個鲜漩， 這些副作用通常只會持續(xù)1-2年源譬。 所以，事前剖析是要提前想好

10:16
你想問醫(yī)生的問題宇整， 這樣會深入推進(jìn)你和醫(yī)生的對話瓶佳。 畢竟你不想事到臨頭 再來思考所有事情。 而且你也需要考慮一下生活質(zhì)量鳞青。 因?yàn)橥ǔＤ闶怯羞x擇的霸饲， 你想要較短的沒有痛苦的人生， 或想要較長的最終 要承受巨大痛苦的人生呢臂拓？ 這些都是現(xiàn)在需要 談?wù)摵退伎嫉膯栴}厚脉， 和你的家人，愛人一起胶惰。 你可能會在事發(fā)時改變你的想法傻工， 但至少你練習(xí)了這種思維方法。 請記住孵滞，我們的大腦 在壓力下會釋放皮質(zhì)醇中捆，

10:49
在那一刻發(fā)生的一件事是 你整個思維系統(tǒng)似乎停工了。 這里有一個進(jìn)化方面的原因坊饶。 和一個捕食者面對面時泄伪， 你不需要你的消化系統(tǒng)， 性欲或者免疫系統(tǒng)的幫助匿级。 因?yàn)槿绻愕纳眢w忙著在 這些事情上進(jìn)行新陳代謝蟋滴， 你就不能迅速作出反應(yīng)染厅， 那么你可能會成為獅子的午餐， 然后那些事情也就不重要了津函， 不幸的是肖粮， 在緊張時，其中一件會出錯的事情是 理性地尔苦，有邏輯地思考涩馆。 Danny Kahneman和他的同事 已經(jīng)證明了這點(diǎn)。 所以蕉堰，我們需要培養(yǎng) 自己超前思考的習(xí)慣凌净， 去面對這類事情。 這里很重要的一點(diǎn)是屋讶，要認(rèn)識 到我們所有人都不是完美的冰寻。

11:33
我們都會不時地經(jīng)歷失敗， 事前剖析就要超前思考 可能的失敗會是什么皿渗， 井然有序地做事有助于 把傷害減到最小斩芭， 或者在第一時間 防止糟糕的事情發(fā)生。 說回到我在蒙特利爾 那個冰天雪地的晚上乐疆，

11:50
當(dāng)我從歐洲返程回到家時划乖， 我的承包商在門旁邊安裝了密碼鎖， 還有一把鑰匙以及 一個簡單易記的密碼挤土。 我不得不承認(rèn)琴庵， 我還是有一堆沒有分類的信件， 以及一堆沒有處理的郵件仰美。 所以迷殿，我還沒能完全做到井然有序， 但我把井然有序做事 看成是一個漸進(jìn)的過程咖杂， 也正在慢慢實(shí)現(xiàn)這個目標(biāo)庆寺。 謝謝。

12:14
（鼓掌）