Door closer, are you?
“關門者”，妳是嗎？
1、 The next time you're deciding between rival options, one which is primary and the other which is secondary, ask yourself this question: What would Xiang Yu do?
譯文：下次妳要在兩個難於取舍的、主要的和次要的選擇之間做決定時，不妨問自己這樣壹個問題：項羽會怎麽做？
2、 Xiang Yu was a Chinese imperial general in the third century BC who took his troops across the Zhang River on a raid into enemy territory. To his troops' astonishment, he ordered their cooking pots crushed and their sailing ships burned.
譯文：項羽是公元前三世紀中國古代王朝的壹位將軍。他帶領他的部隊橫渡漳河，突襲進入了敵方的領地。他下令砸鍋燒船，令他的部隊大為震驚。
3 、He explained that he was imposing on them a necessity for attaining victory over their opponents. What he said was surely motivating, but it wasn't really appreciated by many of his loyal soldiers as they watched their vessels go up in flames. But the genius of General Xiang Yu's conviction would be validated both on the battlefield and in modern social science research. General Xiang Yu was a rare exception to the norm, a veteran leader who was highly respected for his many conquests and who achieved the summit of success.
譯文：他解釋道，他強加給他們的是戰勝對手的必要舉措。他所說的無疑十分鼓舞士氣，但當他那許多忠誠的士兵眼睜睜地看著他們的船只在火焰中被焚毀時，他們並不贊成他的做法。不過項羽將軍的這種砸鍋焚船的做法所顯示出的天賦，在戰場上和現代社會科學研究中都將得到肯定。項羽將軍是壹個罕見的不墨守成規的人，他是壹位經驗豐富的領袖，由於他征戰無數並達到了成功的頂峰，他深受尊敬。
4、 He is featured in Dan Ariely's enlightening new publication, Predictably Irrational, a fascinating investigation of seemingly irrational human behavior, such as the tendency for keeping multiple options open. Most people can't marshal the will for painful choices, not even students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where Dr. Ariely teaches behavioral economics. In an experiment that investigated decision-making, hundreds of students couldn't bear to let their options vanish, even though it was clear they would profit from doing so.
譯文：丹·阿雷利極富啟迪性的新書《可預見的非理性》對項羽作了專題介紹。這本書對看似非理性的人類行為，譬如人類總想留住多項選擇機會的傾向，進行了引人入勝的調查。大多數人都不能整理自己的思路來做痛苦的選擇，麻省理工學院上阿雷利博士行為經濟學這門課的學生也不例外。在調查作決策的壹項實驗中，幾百名學生都不能忍受眼睜睜看著他們的選擇機會消失，即使他們很清楚這樣做對他們有利。
5 、The experiment revolved around a game that eliminated the excuses we usually have for refusing to let go. In the real world, we can always say, "It's good to preserve our options." Want a good example? A teenager is exhausted from soccer, ballet, piano, and Chinese lessons, but her parents won't stop any one of them because they might come in handy some day!
譯文：實驗是圍繞著壹個遊戲展開的，這個遊戲排除了我們通常不肯放手的借口。在現實世界裏，我們總會說：“保留我們的選擇機會是對的。”想要壹個好的例子嗎？壹個十多歲的女孩被足球、芭蕾舞、鋼琴、中文課給累得筋疲力盡，但她的父母不會讓她停止任何壹項活動，理由是它們有壹天可能會派上用場！
6、 In the experiment sessions, students played a computer game that provided cash behind three doors appearing on the screen. The rule was the more money you earned, the better player you were, given a total of 100 clicks. Every time the students opened a door by clicking on it, they would use up one click but wouldn't get any money. However, each subsequent click on that door would earn a fluctuating sum of money, with one door always revealing more money than the others. The important part of the rule was each door switch, though having no cash value, would also use up one of the 100 clicks. Therefore, the winning strategy was to quickly check all the doors and keep clicking on the one with the seemingly highest rewards.
譯文：在這個實驗裏，學生要玩壹個電腦遊戲:在電腦屏幕上會顯示三扇門，每扇門後都會提供壹些現金。該遊戲的規則是每個人都只能點擊100次，妳點擊獲取的錢越多，妳就玩得越好。學生每點擊壹次打開壹扇門，他們會用掉壹個點擊數，但卻不會得到任何錢。然而，隨後接著在那扇門上的每次點擊都會掙得數額不等的錢，三扇門顯示的錢總有壹扇比另外兩扇多。這個遊戲規則的重點是雖然每次換門沒有金錢回報，可還是會用掉壹次點擊數。所以，制勝戰略是要迅速查看所有的門，然後只點擊那扇似乎是錢最多的門。
7 、While playing the game, students noticed a modified visual element: Any door left unclicked for a short while would shrink in size and vanish. Since they already understood the game, they should have ignored the vanishing doors. Nevertheless, they hurried to click on the lesser doors before they vanished, trying to keep them open. As a result, they wasted so many clicks rushing back to the vanishing doors that they lost money in the end. Why were the students so attached to the lesser doors? They would probably protest that they were clinging to the doors to keep future options open, but, according to Dr. Ariely, that isn't the true factor.
譯文：在玩遊戲時，學生們註意到了壹個視覺上的變化：如果有片刻沒點擊某扇門，那扇門就會慢慢縮小並消失。由於他們已了解了遊戲規則，他們本應對要消失的門不予理睬。然而，在它們消失以前，他們卻迫不及待地去點擊那些變小的門，試圖讓它們開啟著。結果是，他們在匆忙回去點擊那些快消失的門時浪費了很多點擊數以至於最後輸了錢。為什麽學生對那些變小的門如此依戀呢？他們可能會爭辯說，他們緊抓住這些門是為將來多留壹些機會。但是，據阿雷利博士說，這不是真正的原因。
8 、Instead of the excuse to maintain future options open, underneath it all the students' desire was to avoid the immediate, though temporary, pain of watching options close. "Closing a door on an option is experienced as a loss, and people are willing to pay a big price to avoid the emotion of loss," Dr. Ariely says. In the experiment, the price was easily measured in lost cash. In life, the corresponding costs are often less obvious such as wasted time or missed opportunities.
譯文：在他們為將來多留壹些機會的借口背後反映出的是所有的學生都不堪目睹眼前的選擇機會被剝奪，盡管這種痛苦是臨時的。阿雷利博士說：“每閉上壹扇選擇之門就如同經受了壹次損失，人們寧願付出很大的代價，也要避免情感的失落。”在實驗中，損失很容易用丟失的現金來衡量。在生活中，相應的損失就往往沒那麽明顯，如浪費時間，錯過機會。
9、 "Sometimes these doors are closing too slowly for us to see them vanishing," Dr. Ariely writes. "We may work more hours at our jobs without realizing that the childhood of our sons and daughters is slipping away."
譯文：“有時候，這些門是慢慢關閉的，我們沒有看到它們在悄然消失，”阿雷利博士寫道：“我們可能花很多時間在工作上，卻沒有意識到我們子女的童年正在悄悄溜走。”
10 、So, what can be done to restore balance in our lives? One answer, Dr. Ariely says, is to implement more prohibitions on overbooking. We can work to reduce options on our own, delegating tasks to others and even giving away ideas for others to pursue. He points to marriage as an example, "In marriage, we create a situation where we promise ourselves not to keep options open. We close doors and announce to others we've closed doors."
譯文：那麽，我們可以做些什麽讓我們的生活恢復平衡呢？阿雷利博士說，壹個辦法是制止更多的超額預約。我們可以自己減少選擇，將任務委派給其他人，甚至放棄壹些點子，讓其他人去做。他用婚姻作為例子：“在婚姻中，我們承諾不保留選擇機會，我們就創造了獲得最佳選擇的有利局面。我們關上可選擇的門，並告訴別人我們已作出選擇。”
11 、Since conducting the door experiment, Dr. Ariely says he has made a conscious effort to lessen his load. He urges the rest of us to resign from committees, prune holiday card lists, rethink hobbies and remember the lessons of door closers like Xiang Yu.
譯文：阿雷利博士說，自從進行了這個點擊門的實驗，他已經有意識地努力減輕自己的負擔。他敦促我們辭去委員會的工作，刪減送節日賀卡的名單，重新思考興趣愛好，並記住像項羽那樣的關門者給我們的啟示。
12、 In other words, Dr. Ariely is encouraging us to discard those things that seem to have outward merit in favor of those things that actually enrich our lives. We are naturally prejudiced to believe that more is better, but Dr. Ariely's research provides a dose of reality that strongly suggests otherwise.
譯文：換言之，他是鼓勵我們放棄那些似乎只有表面價值的東西，而去追求那些能真正豐富我們生活的東西。我們很自然、很偏執地相信選擇越多越好，但阿雷利博士的研究卻強有力地告訴我們事實並非如此。
13 、What price do we pay for trying to have more and more in life? What pleasure and satisfaction can be derived from focusing our energy and attention in a more concentrated fashion? Surely, we will have our respective answers.
譯文：我們想在生活中得到越來越多選擇的代價是什麽？我們能從更集中的精力和註意力中獲得什麽樣的喜悅和滿足？當然，我們每個人都會有自己的答案。
14、 Consider these important questions: Will we have more by always increasing options or will we have more with fewer, carefully chosen options? What doors should we close in order to allow the right windows of opportunity and happiness to open?
譯文：試想壹下這些重要的問題：怎麽做會使我們獲得更多，是不斷增加選擇，還是只保持少數精心挑選的選擇？我們應關閉什麽門，以便讓機會和幸福之窗打開？