4.4 Find out what you and others are like.

4.4 認(rèn)識你自己以及他人。

Because of the biases with which we are wired, our self-assessments (and our assessments of others) tend to be highly inaccurate. Psychometric assessments are much more reliable. They are important in helping explore how people think during the hiring process and throughout employment. Though psychometric assessments cannot fully replace speaking with people and looking at their backgrounds and histories, they are far more powerful than traditional interviewing and screening methods. If I had to choose between just the assessments or just traditional job interviews to get at what people are like, I would choose the assessments. Fortunately, we don’t have to make that choice.

由于思維上的偏見背传，我們的自我評估（以及對他人的評估）往往是高度不準(zhǔn)確的尔许。通過心理測量來評估更為可靠碍侦。在招聘過程中以及整個(gè)就業(yè)期間傻咖，心理測量在探究人們?nèi)绾嗡伎挤矫姘瘴紩鸬胶苤匾淖饔每跤唷１M管心理測量評估無法完全取代與對方談話、查看他們歷史背景的評估方法薪鹦，但心理測量遠(yuǎn)比傳統(tǒng)的采訪和篩選的方式更有效掌敬。如果我不得不在心理測量和傳統(tǒng)的工作面試兩者中選擇其中一個(gè)惯豆，來了解對方是怎樣的人，我會選擇心理測量奔害。幸運(yùn)的是楷兽，我們不必做出這樣的選擇。

The four main assessments we use are the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), the Workplace Personality Inventory, the Team Dimensions Profile, and Stratified Systems Theory.But we are constantly experimenting (for example, with the Big Five) so our mix will certainly change. Whatever the mix, they all convey people’s preferences for thinking and action. They also provide us with new attributes and terminologies that clarify and amplify those we had identified on our own. I will describe a few of them below. These descriptions are based on my own experiences and learnings, which are in many ways different from the official descriptions used by the assessment companies.

我們使用的四個(gè)主要心理評估是：邁爾斯 - 布里格斯類型指標(biāo)（MBTI）华临，職場人格量表芯杀，團(tuán)隊(duì)維度概況和分層系統(tǒng)理論。但是我們正在不斷實(shí)驗(yàn)（例如雅潭，與大五人格測試）組合使用揭厚，這些組合肯定會有變化。但無論什么樣的組合扶供，它們都傳達(dá)了人們思考和行動上的偏好筛圆。它們還為我們提供了新的屬性和術(shù)語，以對我們自己已經(jīng)確定的人格特質(zhì)進(jìn)行澄清和強(qiáng)化椿浓。我將在下文描述其中的一些太援。這些描述是基于我自己的經(jīng)驗(yàn)和學(xué)習(xí)，與心理評估公司使用的官方描述有許多不同之處轰绵。

**a. Introversion vs. extroversion. **Introverts focus on the inner world and get their energy from ideas, memories, and experiences while extroverts are externally focused and get their energy from being with people. Introversion and extroversion are also linked to differences in communication styles. If you have a friend who loves to “talk out” ideas (and even has trouble thinking through something if there isn’t someone around to work it through with), he or she is likely an extrovert. Introverts will usually find such conversations painful, preferring to think privately and share only after they’ve worked things out on their own. I’ve found that it is important to help each communicate in the way that they feel most comfortable. For example, introverts often prefer communicating in writing (such as email) rather than speaking in group settings and tend to be less open with their critical thoughts.

a. 內(nèi)向與外向粉寞。內(nèi)向者專注于內(nèi)心世界尼荆，他們從思想左腔、記憶和經(jīng)驗(yàn)中獲得能量；而外向者則專注在外部捅儒，在與他人相處中獲得能量液样。 內(nèi)向與外向也與不同的溝通風(fēng)格有關(guān)。如果你有一個(gè)喜歡“說出”想法的朋友（甚至在周圍沒人一起工作時(shí)巧还，他們就沒法想清楚問題鞭莽，那么他或她很可能是一個(gè)外向者）。內(nèi)向者通常會感覺這樣的對話很痛苦麸祷，他們寧愿私下思考澎怒，而且只有在他們自己想清楚之后才會分享他們的想法。我發(fā)現(xiàn)幫助每個(gè)人以他們最舒服的方式進(jìn)行交流非常重要阶牍。例如喷面，內(nèi)向者通常喜歡以書面形式（比如電子郵件）交流，而不是在小組環(huán)境中進(jìn)行交流走孽，他們對于批判性的想法往往也不那么開放惧辈。

**b. Intuiting vs. sensing. **Some people see big pictures (forests) and others see details (trees). In the Myers-Briggs framework, these ways of seeing are best represented by the continuum from intuiting to sensing. You can get an idea of people’s preferences by observing what they focus on. For example, when reading, a sensing person who focuses on details can be thrown off by typos such as “there” instead of “their,” while intuitive thinkers won’t even notice the mistake. That is because the intuitive thinker’s attention is focused on the context first and the details second. Naturally, you’d rather have a sensing person than an intuitor preparing your legal documents, where every “i” must be properly dotted and every “t” crossed just so.

b. 直覺與感知。有些人看大局（森林）磕瓷，另一些人看細(xì)節(jié)（樹）盒齿。在邁爾斯 - 布里格斯人格理論框架中念逞，從直覺到感知連續(xù)看問題的方式是最好的。你可以通過觀察人們所關(guān)注的東西边翁，來了解他們的偏好翎承。例如，在閱讀時(shí)符匾，一個(gè)專注于細(xì)節(jié)的感知型可能會被諸如“哪”而不是“那”這樣的錯(cuò)別字打斷审洞，而直覺型思考者甚至看不到這些錯(cuò)誤。這是因?yàn)橹庇X思維者的注意力首先集中在語境上待讳。然后才是細(xì)節(jié)芒澜。自然，你寧愿一個(gè)感知者创淡，而不是一個(gè)直覺者來準(zhǔn)備你的法律文件痴晦，因?yàn)榉晌募笾蛔植徊睿终寰渥谩?/p>

c. Thinking vs. feeling. Some people make decisions based on logical analysis of objective facts, considering all the known, provable factors important to a given situation and using logic to determine the best course of action. This approach is an indicator of a preference for thinking and is how you’d hope your doctor thinks when he makes a diagnosis. Other people—who prefer feeling—focus on harmony between people. They are better suited to roles that require lots of empathy, interpersonal contact, and relationship building, for example HR and customer service. Before we had assessments to identify these differences, conversations between “Ts” and “Fs” were really frustrating. Now we laugh as we bump up against our differences, because we know what they are and can see them playing out in classic ways.

c. 思維與情感琳彩。有些人依據(jù)對客觀事實(shí)的邏輯分析做出決定誊酌，他們認(rèn)為所有已知的，被證實(shí)的因素對于一個(gè)給定的情境很重要露乏，并且運(yùn)用邏輯來確定最佳的行動方案碧浊。這樣的行為方式可以提示你這是個(gè)偏思維型的人，你希望你的醫(yī)生在做出診斷時(shí)也這樣去思考問題瘟仿。另一些人偏情感型箱锐，他們關(guān)注人與人之間的和諧。這些人更適合那些需要大量同理心劳较、人際交往和關(guān)系建設(shè)的角色驹止，比如人力資源和客服。在我們沒有評估和識別出這些差異之前观蜗，“思維型”和“情感型”人之間的對話真的很讓人沮喪‰担現(xiàn)在當(dāng)我們遇到這樣的分歧時(shí)，會一笑而過墓捻，因?yàn)槲覀冎缹Ψ绞悄姆N類型的人抖仅，并能看出對方的言行有多典型。

d. Planning vs. perceiving. Some people like to live in a planned, orderly way and others prefer flexibility and spontaneity. Planners (or “Judgers” in Myers-Briggs terms) like to focus on a plan and stick with it, while perceivers are prone to focus on what’s happening around them and adapt to it. Perceivers work from the outside in; they see things happening and work backward to understand the cause and how to respond; they also see many possibilities that they compare and choose from—often so many that they are confused by them. In contrast, planners work from the inside out, first figuring out what they want to achieve and then how things should unfold. Planners and perceivers have trouble appreciating each other. Perceivers see new things and change direction often. This is discomforting to planners, who weigh precedent much more heavily in their decision making, and assume if it was done in a certain way before, it should be done in the same way again. Similarly, planners can discomfort perceivers by being seemingly rigid and slow to adapt.

d.規(guī)劃與覺知砖第。有些人喜歡有計(jì)劃的有條不紊地生活撤卢，有些則喜歡靈活的，隨遇而安的生活厂画。規(guī)劃型（或者邁爾斯 - 布里格斯的“判斷型”）喜歡關(guān)注計(jì)劃并堅(jiān)持下去凸丸，而覺知型傾向于關(guān)注發(fā)生在他們周圍事情，并適應(yīng)它袱院。覺知型由外向內(nèi)運(yùn)作; 他們察覺到發(fā)生的事情屎慢，并探索背后的原因瞭稼，以及應(yīng)如何應(yīng)對; 他們也看到了有很多的可能性供他們比較和選擇。但也常常因?yàn)檫x擇太多而感到困惑腻惠。相反环肘，規(guī)劃型的運(yùn)作方式是從內(nèi)到外的，他們先搞清楚他們想要達(dá)到的目標(biāo)集灌，然后再思考如何開展工作悔雹。 規(guī)劃型和覺知型很難互相欣賞。覺知型經(jīng)承佬看到新事物并改變方向腌零。這對規(guī)劃型來說是令人不安的，規(guī)劃型在決策中把過往的先例看的很重唆阿，并且認(rèn)為以前以哪種方式完成益涧，現(xiàn)在應(yīng)該再次以這種的方式完成。 同樣驯鳖，規(guī)劃型因?yàn)榭雌饋砗芩腊逑醒m應(yīng)速度很慢，也讓覺知型感到不舒服浅辙。

e. Creators vs. refiners vs. advancers vs. executors vs. flexors. By identifying talents and preferences that lead people to feel a particular way, you can place them in jobs at which they will likely excel. At Bridgewater, we use a test called the “Team Dimensions Profile” (TDP) to connect people with their preferred role. The five types identified by the TDP are Creators, Refiners, Advancers, Executors, and Flexors.

創(chuàng)造者 vs 改進(jìn)者 vs 推進(jìn)者 vs 執(zhí)行者 vs 靈活者扭弧。每個(gè)人因其感受事物的特定方式，有不同的天分和偏好记舆，通過去識別這些鸽捻，可以將人們放在各自可能更擅長的工作上。在橋水公司氨淌，我們使用“團(tuán)隊(duì)維度概況”（TDP）測試來將人員與他們較喜歡的工作聯(lián)系起來泊愧。TDP把人分為五種類型：創(chuàng)造者伊磺，改進(jìn)者盛正，推進(jìn)者，執(zhí)行者和機(jī)動者屑埋。

? Creators generate new ideas and original concepts. They prefer unstructured and abstract activities and thrive on innovation and unconventional practices.

? 創(chuàng)作者產(chǎn)生新的想法和原創(chuàng)的概念豪筝。他們喜歡非結(jié)構(gòu)化的和抽象的活動，喜歡創(chuàng)新和非常規(guī)的訓(xùn)練摘能。

**? Advancers **communicate these new ideas and carry them forward. They relish feelings and relationships and manage the human factors. They are excellent at generating enthusiasm for work.

? 推進(jìn)者傳達(dá)這些新的想法并將其推進(jìn)续崖。他們享受情感、關(guān)系和管理人員团搞。他們擅長激發(fā)人們的工作熱情严望。

? Refiners challenge ideas. They analyze projects for flaws, then refine them with a focus on objectivity and analysis. They love facts and theories and working with a systematic approach.

? 改進(jìn)者挑戰(zhàn)現(xiàn)有的觀點(diǎn)。他們分析項(xiàng)目的缺陷逻恐，然后通過客觀的分析進(jìn)行改進(jìn)像吻。他們喜歡事實(shí)和理論峻黍，并使用系統(tǒng)的方法工作。

**? Executors **can also be thought of as Implementers. They ensure that important activities are carried out and goals accomplished; they are focused on details and the bottom line.

?執(zhí)行者也可以被認(rèn)為是實(shí)施者拨匆。他們確保重要活動的開展和目標(biāo)的實(shí)現(xiàn); 他們專注于細(xì)節(jié)和底線姆涩。

? Flexors are a combination of all four types. They can adapt their styles to fit certain needs and are able to look at a problem from a variety of perspectives.

?機(jī)動者是所有四種類型的組合。他們可以調(diào)整自己的風(fēng)格以適應(yīng)某些需求惭每，并能從各種角度看問題骨饿。

Triangulating what I learn from each test reinforces or raises questions about the pictures of people I’m forming in my head. For example, when people’s MBTI results suggest a preference for “S” (focus on details) and “J” (planful), and they come out as executors on the Team Dimension assessment, there is a very good chance that they are more detail-focused than right-brained and imaginative, which means that they would likely fit better in jobs that have less ambiguity and more structure and clarity.

我通過對從各個(gè)心理測試中學(xué)到的東西進(jìn)行三方探討，強(qiáng)化我大腦里對某個(gè)人產(chǎn)生的畫面台腥，也可能會對這個(gè)畫面提出質(zhì)疑亏掀。 例如齿兔，當(dāng)某人的MBTI測試結(jié)果顯示這個(gè)人是偏“S”型（注重細(xì)節(jié)）和“J”型（注重計(jì)劃），且團(tuán)隊(duì)維度概況（TDP）測試的結(jié)果是執(zhí)行者。那么很有可能此人更細(xì)節(jié)導(dǎo)向而非想象力豐富的右腦型趋急，這意味著他們可能更適合那些不模棱兩可的，結(jié)構(gòu)和清晰度更高的工作荆几。

f. Focusing on tasks vs. focusing on goals. Some people are focused on daily tasks while others are focused on their goals and how to achieve them. I’ve found these differences to be quite similar to the differences between people who are intuitive vs. sensing. Those who tend to focus on goals and “visualize” best can see the big pictures over time and are also more likely to make meaningful changes and anticipate future events. These goal-oriented people can step back from the day-to-day and reflect on what and how they’re doing. They are the most suitable for creating new things (organizations, projects, etc.) and managing organizations that have lots of change. They typically make the most visionary leaders because of their ability to take a broad view and see the whole picture.

f.任務(wù)導(dǎo)向與目標(biāo)導(dǎo)向苹支。有些人專注于日常工作，而另一些則專注于他們的目標(biāo)以及如何實(shí)現(xiàn)目標(biāo)俱济。我發(fā)現(xiàn)這兩者間的差異和直覺型與感知型兩者的差異非常相似嘶是。那些傾向于關(guān)注目標(biāo)和最能“可視化”目標(biāo)的人，可以隨著時(shí)間的推移看見大局蛛碌，也更有可能做出有意義的改變并預(yù)測未來的事件聂喇。這些目標(biāo)導(dǎo)向的人可以一天天往后倒推，反思他們在做什么以及如何做蔚携。他們這種人最適合創(chuàng)造新事物（組織希太，項(xiàng)目等）以及管理變化較多的組織。他們通常是最有遠(yuǎn)見的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者酝蜒，因?yàn)樗麄冇心芰膹V泛的角度看待全局誊辉。

In contrast, those who tend to focus on daily tasks are better at managing things that don’t change much or that require processes to be completed reliably. Task-oriented people tend to make incremental changes that reference what already exists. They are slower to depart from the status quo and more likely to be blindsided by sudden events. On the other hand, they’re typically more reliable. Although it may seem that their focus is narrower than higher-level thinkers, the roles they play are no less critical. I would never have gotten this book out or accomplished hardly anything else worthwhile if I didn’t work with people who are wonderful at taking care of details.

相比之下，那些更關(guān)注日常工作的人可以更好地管理變化不大或者要求可靠地完成各項(xiàng)流程的工作亡脑。任務(wù)導(dǎo)向的人傾向參考已經(jīng)存在的事物堕澄，做一些漸進(jìn)的改變。他們脫離現(xiàn)狀比較慢霉咨，更有可能在突如其來的改變面前思想僵化蛙紫。但另一方面，他們通常更可靠途戒。盡管看起來他們關(guān)注的范圍相比高水平的思考者更狹隘坑傅，但他們所扮演的角色也同樣重要。如果我不和那些善于處理細(xì)節(jié)的人一起工作喷斋，我永遠(yuǎn)也拿不出這本書唁毒，也完不成其他任何有價(jià)值的工作矢渊。

g. Workplace Personality Inventory. Another assessment we use is the Workplace Personality Inventory, a test based on data from the U.S. Department of Labor. It anticipates behavior and predicts job fit and satisfaction, singling out certain key characteristics/qualities, including persistence, independence, stress tolerance, and analytical thinking. This test helps us understand what people value and how they will make trade-offs between their values. For example, someone with low Achievement Orientation and high Concern for Others might be unwilling to step on others’ toes in order to accomplish their goals. Likewise, someone who is bad at Rule Following may be more likely to think independently.

g.職場人格量表。我們使用的另一個(gè)心理測試是職場人格量表枉证，這是一個(gè)基于美國勞工部數(shù)據(jù)的測試矮男。它對工作表現(xiàn)以及工作的適應(yīng)性和滿意度進(jìn)行預(yù)測，它挑出某些關(guān)鍵的性格/品質(zhì)室谚，包括持久性毡鉴，獨(dú)立性，壓力耐受度和分析能力秒赤。這個(gè)測試幫助我們了解人們的價(jià)值觀以及他們?nèi)绾卧趦r(jià)值觀之間取舍猪瞬。例如，一個(gè)成就導(dǎo)向性低且高度關(guān)注他人的員工可能不愿為了完成目標(biāo)而踩到別人的腳趾入篮。同樣的陈瘦，不擅長遵守規(guī)則的人更傾向獨(dú)立思考。

We have found that something like twenty-five to fifty attributes can pretty well describe what a person is like. Each one comes in varying degrees of strength (like color tones). If you know what they are and put them together correctly, they will paint a pretty complete picture of a person. Our objective is to use test results and other information to try to do just that. We prefer to do it in partnership with the person being looked at, because it helps us be more accurate and at the same time it’s very helpful to them to see themselves objectively.

我們發(fā)現(xiàn)潮售，二十五到五十個(gè)屬性就可以很好地描述一個(gè)人是什么樣的痊项。每個(gè)人在相同的屬性上力度也不一樣（如顏色有不同的色調(diào)）。 如果你知道它們是什么并將它們準(zhǔn)確地放在一起酥诽，那么你將繪制出一幅相當(dāng)完整的人物圖片鞍泉。使用測試結(jié)果以及其他信息努力做到這一點(diǎn)是我們的目標(biāo)。我們傾向通過與被觀察者合作來做這件事肮帐，因?yàn)檫@既有助于結(jié)果更加準(zhǔn)確咖驮，又可以幫助他們客觀地看待自己。

Certain attributes combine frequently to produce recognizable archetypes. If you think about it, you can probably come up with a handful of archetypal people you meet over and over again in life: the spacey, impractical Artist; the tidy Perfectionist; the Crusher who runs through brick walls to get things done; the Visionary who pulls amazing big ideas seemingly out of the air. Over time I came up with a list of others, including Shaper, Chirper, Tweaker, and Open-Minded Learner, as well as Advancer, Creator, Cat-Herder, Gossiper, Loyal Doer, Wise Judge, and others.

某一些屬性的結(jié)合經(jīng)常能夠產(chǎn)生識別度很高的原型训枢。如果你想一下托修，你很可能想出一大堆你在人生中反復(fù)遇到的原型人物：那些縹緲的不切實(shí)際的藝術(shù)家; 有潔癖的完美主義者; 不擇手段達(dá)成目標(biāo)的粉碎機(jī); 在天上畫大餅的空想家。隨著時(shí)間的推移恒界，我又想出了其他的一些名單睦刃，包括塑造者，唧唧叫的人仗处，表演者和開放的學(xué)習(xí)者眯勾，以及推進(jìn)者，創(chuàng)造者婆誓，貓牧人，八卦者也颤，忠誠的實(shí)干者洋幻，明斷的法官等等。

To be clear, archetypes are less useful than the better fleshed-out pictures created through the assessments. They are not precise; they are more like simple caricatures, but they can be useful when it comes to assembling teams. Individual people will always be more complex than the archetypes that describe them, and they may well match up with more than one. For example, the Spacey Artist may or may not also be a Perfectionist or may be a Crusher too. While I won’t go over all of them, I will describe Shapers—the one that best represents me—in some depth.

要搞清楚的是翅娶，原型相比通過心理評估產(chǎn)生的更飽滿的人物圖片來說沒那么有用文留。它們不精確; 更像是簡單的漫畫好唯，但是在搭建團(tuán)隊(duì)時(shí)很有用。個(gè)人總是比描述他們的原型更為復(fù)雜燥翅，而且他們可能會有不止一個(gè)相匹配的原型骑篙。例如，縹緲的藝術(shù)家可能是也可能不是一個(gè)完美主義者森书，或者是粉碎機(jī)靶端。 雖然我不會詳細(xì)介紹所有這些原型，但我會在一定程度上描述最能代表我的“塑造者”凛膏。

h. Shapers are people who can go from visualization to actualization. I wrote a lot about the people I call “shapers” in the first part of this book. I use the word to mean someone who comes up with unique and valuable visions and builds them out beautifully, typically over the doubts of others. Shapers get both the big picture and the details right. To me, it seems that Shaper = Visionary + Practical Thinker + Determined.

h.塑造者是那些把想象的畫面變成到現(xiàn)實(shí)的人杨名。我在本書的第一部分寫了很多關(guān)于那個(gè)我稱為“塑造者”的人。 我用這個(gè)詞來表達(dá)這種人猖毫，他們提出獨(dú)特而有價(jià)值的愿景台谍，在他人的質(zhì)疑中，將他們的愿景漂漂亮亮的實(shí)現(xiàn)吁断。 塑造者既能看到大局趁蕊，又能看到細(xì)節(jié)。 對我來說仔役，塑造者 = 愿景 + 實(shí)際的思考 +決心介衔。

I’ve found that shapers tend to share attributes such as intense curiosity and a compulsive need to make sense of things, independent thinking that verges on rebelliousness, a need to dream big and unconventionally, a practicality and determination to push through all obstacles to achieve their goals, and a knowledge of their own and others’ weaknesses and strengths so they can orchestrate teams to achieve them. Perhaps even more importantly, they can hold conflicting thoughts simultaneously and look at them from different angles. They typically love to knock things around with other really smart people and can easily navigate back and forth between the big picture and the granular details, counting both as equally important.

我發(fā)現(xiàn)塑造者傾往往有一些共同的屬性，如強(qiáng)烈的好奇心且迫切需要理解事物骂因，接近叛逆的獨(dú)立思考炎咖，需要大而非常規(guī)的夢想，推開所有障礙實(shí)現(xiàn)目標(biāo)的實(shí)踐性和決心寒波，了解他們自己和他人的弱點(diǎn)與長處乘盼，以便他們可以協(xié)調(diào)團(tuán)隊(duì)來實(shí)現(xiàn)目標(biāo)。也許更重要的是俄烁，他們可以同時(shí)持有相互矛盾的想法绸栅，從不同的角度去看待問題。他們通常喜歡與其他非常聰明的人打交道页屠，并且可以輕松地在全局和細(xì)節(jié)之間來回切換粹胯，這一點(diǎn)也同樣重要。

People wired with enough of these ways of thinking that they can operate in the world as shapers are very rare. But they could never succeed without working with others who are more naturally suited for other things and whose ways of thinking and acting are also essential.

要具備足夠的這些思維方式辰企，讓在世界上做為塑造者運(yùn)作的人风纠，非常稀有。 但是如果不和那些更自然的適合其他方面的人合作牢贸，塑造者絕不可能成功竹观。因?yàn)檫@些人的思維方式和行為方式也是不可或缺的。

Knowing how one is wired is a necessary first step on any life journey. It doesn’t matter what you do with your life, as long as you are doing what is consistent with your nature and your aspirations. Having spent time with some of the richest, most powerful, most admired people in the world, as well as some of the poorest, most disadvantaged people in the most obscure corners of the globe, I can assure you that, beyond a basic level, there is no correlation between happiness levels and conventional markers of success. A carpenter who derives his deepest satisfaction from working with wood can easily have a life as good or better than the president of the United States. If you’ve learned anything from this book I hope it’s that everyone has strengths and weaknesses, and everyone has an important role to play in life. Nature made everything and everyone for a purpose. The courage that’s needed the most isn’t the kind that drives you to prevail over others, but the kind that allows you to be true to your truest self, no matter what other people want you to be.

任何人生旅程必須要做的第一步都是了解一個(gè)人的思維方式是怎樣的。你的人生拿來去做什么都沒關(guān)系臭增，只要你做的事情和自己的本性與愿望一致懂酱。我曾與世界上最富有，最有權(quán)勢誊抛，最受尊敬的人們共度過一段時(shí)間列牺，還有一些最貧困，住在全世界最偏僻的角落拗窃，處境最差的人瞎领。我可以向你們保證，超過一個(gè)基本的水平后并炮，幸福程度和傳統(tǒng)的成功之間沒有什么相關(guān)性默刚。一個(gè)從木頭工作中獲得最深刻滿足感的木匠，很容易擁有和美國總統(tǒng)一樣甚至更幸福的生活逃魄。 如果你已經(jīng)從本書中學(xué)到了什么荤西，我希望是每個(gè)人都有自己的優(yōu)點(diǎn)和缺點(diǎn)，每個(gè)人在生活中都扮演著一個(gè)重要的角色伍俘。大自然創(chuàng)造的每樣?xùn)|西每一個(gè)人都是有目的邪锌。 你最需要具備的勇氣不是驅(qū)使你超過他人的那種，而是不管他人希望你成為怎樣的人癌瘾，你都能勇敢地忠實(shí)于你最真實(shí)的自己觅丰。