职业与工作方法jamesclear.com
阿喀琉斯之踵效应：为什么我们总是半途而废
The Akrasia Effect: Why We Don’t Follow Through on What We Set Out to Do
2016 — 2018，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
James Clear（《原子习惯》作者）在这篇文章中解释了"Akrasia"——古希腊人用来形容"明知该做却迟迟不做"的意志薄弱现象，剖析我们为何总是无法按计划行事，并给出若干对策，如提前设计好未来的行动、降低开始一件事的阻力等。
为什么经久不衰：知行不一是跨越时代的普遍困境，这篇文章给问题命了名并给出可立即上手的做法，至今仍是行为改变领域常读常新的入门经典。
HN 评论精选
拖延源于我们对未来自我认同感弱，本质上是对未来自己的"自私"。
我有个个人理论：人们拖延，是因为没有把"未来的自己"具体认同为与现在的自己是同一个人，而是把他当成一个抽象的人，更像朋友而非自己。这种认同感还随时间衰减：对"明天的自己"认同感像最好的朋友，对几年、几十年后的自己则像远房表亲。从这个角度看，拖延类似于自私：非常"利他"的人会像对待当下欲望那样优先对待未来的自己，甚至更甚；而更"自我中心"的人则把未来的自己视为陌生人，其需求无关紧要。真正有趣的是研究"对未来的利他"与传统利他是否相关——可以想象两者毫不相干，就像种族主义者可能对其他族群冷漠，却在自己族群内乐善好施；但若真有强相关性，那会是非常有意思的发现。
whack查看英文原文
I have a pet theory than the reason people procrastinate, is because they don't concretely identify their future selves, as being the "same person" as their present self. Rather, they view their future self as an abstract person, more akin to a friend, than self. This level of relatedness varies with time as well. People identify very strongly with their future self from tomorrow, perhaps akin to their best friend. But they identify their future self from years/decades later, more akin to a distant cousin. From this perspective, procrastination becomes analogous to selfishness. A very "altruistic" person would prioritize their future self to the same extent that they would prioritize their present desires. Perhaps even more so. Whereas a more "self centered" person sees their future self as a stranger whose desires are inconsequential to their present selves. What would be really interesting to consider, is the correlation between "future altruism" and traditional altruism. One can imagine these two being completely uncorrelated, the same way a racist person can be completely uncaring towards other races whilst still being altruistic within their own race. But if there is indeed a stronger correlation, that would be a very interesting finding.
把"定计划"和"执行"拆成两种模式，执行时不许做决定，就能绕过即时诱惑的合理化。
我认为"提前设计好未来的行动"是关键。我有个行之有效的框架：把状态分为"建筑师模式"和"执行模式"。建筑师模式是坐下来为长期目标（减肥、健身、学新东西等）制定计划，设定惯例，明确每天具体做什么。把制定计划和实际执行分开很重要，因为这样消除了选择，让你无法拿即时奖励和抽象的远期奖励作比较。执行模式必须遵循建筑师定下的方案，不允许自己做决定——因为在权衡即时奖励（要不要吃那块芝士蛋糕？）和抽象的长期奖励时，你是不可靠的，很容易找借口（反正只多400卡，今天算作弊日）。执行成功的关键是"连续打卡"（每天做、一天不落）和选择足够小的起点，另外别把自己放进容易受诱惑的环境（别买奥利奥放家里）。等节奏稳定后，你在更困难的环境中也会更安全。当执行失败，说明建筑师需要重新审视原因……
fossuser查看英文原文
I think the design your future actions is a big part of this. I've had some success with framing two modes, Architect Mode and Implementation Mode. Architect Mode is when you sit down and make a plan to achieve a long term challenging goal (losing a lot of weight, getting in shape, learning something new, etc.). It's where you set up a routine and plan for what you're specifically going to do each day in order to do this. Being able to separate this plan from when you're actually enacting it is important because it removes the choice and doesn't allow comparisons of an immediate reward with an abstract distant reward. Implementation Mode has to follow what was set up by the architect and is not allowed to make decisions - this is because you're compromised and unreliable when comparing an immediate reward (do I eat that slice of cheesecake?) to a long term abstract reward and it's very easy to rationalize why what you want to do is actually okay (it's only an extra 400 calories anyway - today can be a cheat day etc.). A big part of succeeding with implementation is stacking success (doing the thing every day without missing any day) and picking a small enough starting point. Another is not putting yourself in positions where you're easily tempted to fail (don't buy oreos and have them in the house). Once you get more in the rhythm of things you are safer in more difficult environments. When Implementation mode fails it means the architect needs to reevaluate why and make changes - it doesn't help to ruminate or beat yourself up about the failure. Even with this mindset things are difficult, but I've found it to be the most successful for long term goals when they're clearly defined - most of it is getting the psychology right - then the behavior can follow.
光靠"讲道理"说服不了自己——目标必须具体到能唤起真实体验（"我该跑步"而非"我该减肥"），才能让整个大脑认同。
反过来想：Akrasia 就是对自己价值观判断有缺陷的状态。大脑中会说话的那部分总是自吹自擂、贬低其他部分，关键在于说服你的"全部自己"相信某件事值得做。对自己说"你应该做某事"，就像别人责备你一样没有说服力——语言脑被说服了，但它自我中心，把大脑其他部分当脚凳。比如"我该减肥"对大脑的大部分而言是极其抽象的概念，只是个半生不熟的愿望，不是一项活动。"我该锻炼"好一些，但依然抽象：你不会在抽象中体验锻炼，怎么判断它有没有回报？"我该跑步"更好：你知道跑步是什么感觉，有好有坏，有真实体验可用来判断它的价值。但还是不够：该一直跑吗？语言脑实在太粗糙了……
danharaj查看英文原文
Flip it around: Akrasia is the state of having flawed judgment about one's values. Of course the part of the brain that can speak always speaks highly of itself to the detriment of all the other bits of brain. The important thing is to convince all of yourself that something is worth doing. Telling yourself that you should do something is as persuasive as someone else chiding you to do it. Yes, the verbal, "planning" part of your brain has convinced itself, but it is also self-absorbed and treats the rest of the brain like its footstool. For an example, "I should lose weight" is a ridiculously abstract concept to most of your brain. Your talky bit thinks it's saying something concrete: "Get that number on the scale down", but it hasn't actually said enough. It's a half-baked aspiration, not an activity. "I should exercise" is better: It prescribes an abstract activity that would accomplish the goal. It's still terrible though because it's still abstract. What is the value of exercise in the abstract? You don't experience exercise in the abstract: how could you possibly judge whether it is rewarding or not? How can you decide to "exercise" when exercise isn't even a real thing? "I should run" is even better: You know how running feels. You can feel good running, and you can feel bad running. There are actual experiences and knowledge to draw upon to determine the value of running. Still: Not enough. Should you be running all the time? Verbal brain is being awfully sloppy, and has the gall to blame the rest of the brain for its mistakes. "I should run tomorrow in the morning for 30 minutes when I wake up." And we have arrived at remedy #3 which is called implementation intention. Honestly, what other intentions are actually intentions? If you're not planning concrete actions but abstract classes of actions, you're daydreaming, not planning. Verbal brain likes to talk about how important obligations and commitments are, but avoids doing the work of translating its precious thoughts into something intelligible to the rest of the brain. The verbal part of your brain is easily convinced: By its own words. It doesn't even know what it has convinced itself of but it is awfully satisfied with itself. You, the ensemble of brain bits, are obviously skeptical of such a gullible entity. When you experience satisfaction or gratification for doing something, that is real knowledge to your brain; you learn what is good and what is bad. Of course you're going to prefer real knowledge over the ravings of an imbecile about the great rewards of not-even-a-real-thing.
降低启动阻力：先写有趣的核心部分，杂活以后再补，动力自然就来了。
"降低启动阻力"这条对我帮助巨大。尤其当"开始"意味着一堆杂活时——写 Dockerfile、初始化 git 仓库、创建包元数据文件等等。我发现先一头扎进去写"好玩"的部分，之后再把它变成"正经"项目，会很有帮助。通常写不到一小时代码，我就做出了值得保存和复用的东西，动力问题也就不存在了。
olooney查看英文原文
"Reduce friction to start" is a huge one for me. Especially if "starting" is a bunch of busywork like writing a Dockerfile, initializing a git repo, creating package metadata files, etc. I've found it helpful to just dive in and start writing the "fun" part first and turn it into a "real" project later. Usually after an hour of coding or less I feel I've created something of value that I want to save and reuse so there's no motivational problem.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
用十年时间自学编程（1998）
Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years (1998)
Peter Norvig 1998 年的经典文章，回应“21天/24小时学会编程”一类速成书，主张真正精通编程需要约十年持续、有意识的练习。
职业与工作方法上首页 11 次 · 2007–2025norvig.com编辑精选如何成为一名程序员：简短、全面而个人的总结
How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary
一篇广为流传的程序员成长指南，作者以个人经验系统总结了成为优秀程序员所需的各项技能——从调试、测试、沟通到团队协作与身心健康。
职业与工作方法上首页 6 次 · 2008–2015samizdat.mines.edu编辑精选不要自称程序员
Don't Call Yourself a Programmer
经典职业建议文章劝软件工程师不要把自己局限在“程序员”这个标签上，而要从公司业务角度说明自己创造的价值；文中讨论了成本中心与利润中心、头衔、求职与职业选择，也顺带批评了学术界的价…
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2011–2021kalzumeus.com编辑精选创作者的日程与经理的日程
Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule (2009)
Paul Graham 在这篇文章里把时间表分成两类：管理者的日程以小时为单位，会议可以填满一天；创作者（程序员、写作者等）的日程则以半天为单位，需要长时间不被打断的连续块。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021paulgraham.com编辑精选为什么程序员的薪酬不与生产力成正比
Why programmers are not paid in proportion to their productivity
讨论为什么程序员的薪酬往往不随其生产力成比例增长：生产力难以客观量化，薪酬更多受组织预算、岗位定价和个人议价能力影响。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2022johndcook.com