内容来源：https://nav.al/fool

内容总结：

【观点聚焦】成功法则：拥抱现实，对自己负责，拒绝自我欺骗

知名投资人Naval在其分享中阐述了一套直指核心的个人成长与成功哲学。他强调，一种至关重要的心态是为自己身上发生的一切坏事承担全部责任，这虽看似有些“不真实”，却极具建设性。若能更进一步，将一切好运归功于幸运，则更为有益。但归根结底，忠于真相是基石，不应自欺。

根据其长期观察，一个不争的事实是：那些极度努力、专注投入、永不放弃并对长远结果负责的人，最终几乎都能在他们专注的领域取得成功。每一位成功者都深谙此道。他以物理学家理查德·费曼为例，指出费曼自认并非天才，只是极度努力和专注的普通人，天赋是必要条件，但远非充分条件。

Naval直言不讳地指出，许多人的问题在于潜力远未释放，他鼓励朋友们停止空想，将潜力转化为行动力。他特别指出，人并非静态存在，而是动态发展的，通过实践学习，能力会不断提升，因此“停止找借口，投身实践”是关键。

在谈及哲学家叔本华的影响时，Naval认为，叔本华的独特价值在于其毫不妥协的真诚与对独立思考的极致追求。叔本华的文字充满了其坚信的真理，不为取悦他人而写作。这种态度赋予了Naval“做真实自己”的勇气，即坦然接受并发挥自己的长处，不必因害怕“木秀于林”而刻意合群。当然，这并非鼓励妄自尊大，真正的卓越应由客观事实而非主观评价来认定。

Naval进一步尖锐地指出，来自他人（包括亲友、奖项、评论界）的反馈往往带有“水分”，是失真的。真实的反馈只来源于两个渠道：自由市场和自然规律（物理现实）。前者体现在“产品是否有人买单”，后者体现在“火箭能否成功发射”、“无人机能否正常飞行”、“3D打印机是否达到预设精度”等冰冷的事实上。

他总结道，个人容易自我欺骗，也易被他人欺骗，但你永远无法欺骗自然母亲（Mother Nature）。这意味着，唯有接受客观现实的无情检验，才能获得真正的成长与成功。这一观点强调了在实践中求真务实、拒绝虚幻赞誉的极端重要性。

中文翻译：

你必须要为发生在自己身上的一切坏事负责——这是一种思维模式。

或许有点自欺欺人，但这种想法很能自我安慰。事实上，如果你能更进一步，把发生在自己身上的所有好事都归功于运气，或许也会有所帮助。但在某个层面上，真相至关重要。你不应该逃避现实。

根据我的观察，事实的真相是：那些非常努力、严于律己、永不放弃、并在足够长的时间跨度内为结果承担责任的人，最终都会在他们专注的领域取得成功。每个成功案例都深知这一点。

理查德·费曼常说他自己并非天才，只是个肯下苦功的普通孩子。当然，他显然非常聪明——但聪明是必要条件，而非充分条件。我们都熟悉那种聪明却懒惰之人的典型形象。

我喜欢调侃我所有的朋友——包括尼维——我注意到这些人的一个问题在于，你们的实际表现远低于自身潜力。你们的潜力远比现状高出太多。必须将部分潜能转化为行动。

讽刺的是，这反而会提升你的潜力，因为我们不是静止的存在。

我们是动态发展的生命体。通过实践，你会收获更多认知。所以请停止找借口，直接投身竞技场吧。

尼维：你也很喜欢叔本华。从他那里学到了什么？他的著作中有令你惊讶的观点吗？

叔本华不适合所有人，而且他的思想存在多重面向。他著述颇丰，你可以读他那些晦涩的哲学专著，比如《作为意志和表象的世界》——那是写给其他哲学家看的；也可以看他更实用的作品，例如《论生存的虚无》。

他是历史上少数敢于直抒胸臆的写作者，只记录自己确信的真理。虽非永远正确，但从不欺瞒读者——这种特质贯穿字里行间。他对事物的思考极为深刻。

他不太在意他人评价，唯一在乎的是："我写下的每个字都源于真知"。

他从不故弄玄虚，不用华丽辞藻，不刻意取悦读者。

人们称他为悲观主义者。我认为这有失公允。他的世界观或许可被解读为悲观，但当我需要直面残酷真相时，总会阅读他的作品。

叔本华对我的独特意义在于：他彻底解放了我的本真。他对大众想法毫不在意，对平庸思维的蔑视溢于言表。

我未必完全认同这点——我比他更具平等主义倾向。但他确实赋予你做自己的勇气。所以如果你擅长某事，不必羞于承认。坦然接受自己的天赋。

这对我曾是难题，因为我们都渴望合群。若想融入群体，就不愿太过突出——正如谚语所说：木秀于林，风必摧之。

但若要成就非凡，就必须在某些方面押注自己。如果你在某领域出类拔萃，就需要承认这份卓越——或至少努力追求卓越——而非担忧他人眼光。

当然也不应陷入妄自尊大。从事投资行业的人常会遇到那种高喊"我某方面特别厉害"却脱离实际的人。不，你不能自封卓越。唯有他人能评判你的卓越，而且你母亲的评价不算数。

来自他人的反馈往往是虚假的。奖项是虚妄的。评论家言论是虚伪的。亲友的赞美也未必真实。他们或许试图真诚，但整个环境充斥着虚饰，你很难获得真实反馈。

真实反馈只来自自由市场和自然规律。物理法则冷酷无情：你的产品要么成功运转，要么失败。自由市场铁面无私：人们要么购买，要么拒绝。但人际反馈总是掺杂虚饰。

群体无法提供有效反馈，因为群体追求的是和谐共处。个体探索真理，群体寻求共识。失去和谐的群体会分崩离析。群体规模越大，反馈价值就越低。

不必依赖母亲、朋友、家人的反馈，甚至不必看重颁奖典礼或荣誉体系。

如果你的公司目标只是登上杂志封面或赢得行业奖项，那注定失败。

你需要的是客户。这才是真实反馈。你需要来自自然的反馈：

你的火箭成功发射了吗？
你的无人机顺利起飞了吗？
你的3D打印机是否在预定时间、预算成本内，以规定精度完成了打印？

欺骗自己很容易。被他人蒙蔽也很容易。
但谁都不可能欺骗自然法则。

英文来源：

It Is Impossible to Fool Mother Nature
Naval: You have to take responsibility for everything bad that happens to you—and this is a mindset.
Maybe it’s a little fake, but it’s very self-serving. And in fact, if you can go the extra mile and just attribute everything good that happens to you to luck, that might be helpful too. But at some level, truth is very important. You don’t want to fake it.
From what I have observed, the truth of the matter is: People who work very hard and apply themselves and don’t give up and take responsibility for the outcomes on a long enough time scale, end up succeeding in whatever they’re focused on. And every success case knows this.
Richard Feynman used to say that he wasn’t a genius. He was just a boy who applied himself and worked really hard. Yeah, he was very smart, obviously. But that was necessary, but not sufficient. We all know the trope of the smart, lazy guy.
And I like to harass all of my friends—including Nivi—that one of the problems I notice with these guys is you’re just operating way below potential. Your potential is so much higher than where you are. You have to apply some of that into kinetic.
And ironically that will raise your potential because we’re not static creatures.
We’re dynamic creatures. And you will learn more. You will learn by doing. So just stop making excuses and get in the ring.
Nivi: You also like Schopenhauer. What have you learned from Schopenhauer, or is there anything surprising in his work?
Naval: Schopenhauer is not for everybody and there are many different Schopenhauers. He wrote quite a bit, and you could read his more obscure philosophical texts, like The World as Will and Idea, where he was writing for other philosophers. Or you could read his more practical stuff like On the Vanity of Existence.
He was one of the few people in history who wrote unflinchingly. He wrote what he believed to be true. He wasn’t always correct, but he never lied to you—and that comes across. He thought about things very deeply.
He didn’t care that much what people thought of him. All he knew was, “What I am writing down I know to be true.”
He also didn’t put on any airs. He didn’t use fancy language; he didn’t try to impress you.
People call him a pessimist. I don’t think that’s entirely fair. I think his worldview could be interpreted as pessimistic, but I just read him when I want to read a harsh dose of truth.
What Schopenhauer did uniquely for me is that he gave me complete permission to be me. He just did not care at all what the masses thought, and his disdain for common thinking comes out.
Now, I don’t necessarily share that—I’m a little bit more of an egalitarian than he was. But he really gives you permission to be yourself. So if you’re good at something, don’t be shy about it. Accept that you’re good at something.
And that was hard for me because we all want to get along. If you want to get along in a group, you don’t want to stand out too much. It’s the old line: The tall poppy gets cut.
But if you’re going to do anything exceptional, you do have to bet on yourself in some way. And if you’re exceptional at something, that does require you acknowledging that you’re exceptional at it—or at least trying to be—and not worrying about what other people think.
Now, you don’t want to be delusional either. Anyone who has been in the investing business is constantly hit by people who say, “I’m so great at something,” and they’re a little delusional. No, you don’t get to say you’re exceptional at something. Other people get to say you’re exceptional at something, and your mom doesn’t count.
Feedback from other people is usually fake. Awards are fake. Critics are fake. Kudos from your friends and family are fake. They might try to be genuine, but it’s lost in such a sea of fakeness that you’re not going to get real feedback.
Real feedback comes from free markets and nature. Physics is harsh: either your product worked, or it didn’t. Free markets are harsh: either people buy it, or they don’t. But feedback from other people is fake.
You can’t get good feedback from groups because groups are just trying to get along. Individuals search for truth, groups search for consensus. A group that doesn’t get along decoheres. It falls apart. And the larger the group, the less good feedback you’re going to get from it.
You don’t want to necessarily rely on feedback from your mom or your friends or your family, or even from award ceremonies and award systems.
If you’re optimizing your company to end up on the cover of a magazine, or to win an industry award, you’re failing.
You need customers. That’s your real feedback. You need feedback from nature.
Did your rocket launch?
Did your drone fly?
Did your 3D printer print the object within the tolerances that it was supposed to, in the time it was supposed to, in the cost budget that it was supposed to?
It’s very easy to fool yourself. It’s very easy to be fooled by others.
It is impossible to fool Mother Nature.