思考与写作cia.gov编辑精选
思考如何思考
Thinking About Thinking (1999)
2018 — 2020，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
这是 CIA《情报分析心理学》中的一章，探讨分析人员如何反思自己的思维过程（元认知），识别认知偏差，并改进分析方法。文章强调在信息过载或矛盾时，关键不是收集更多数据，而是建立更准确的心智模型和更好的分析工具。
为什么经久不衰：它对人类认知局限与决策偏见的讨论超越了情报领域，任何需要基于信息做判断的人都能从中获得启发，因此历久弥新。
HN 评论精选
书是经典，提供了实用的思维工具。
这本书是经典。我通读了好几遍，觉得它发人深省且很有帮助。作者提供了“显式认知过程”的工具，帮助分析复杂局面。
hx2a查看英文原文
This book is a classic. I've read the whole thing several times and found it to be thought provoking and helpful. The author gives you tools for "explicit cognitive processes" to aid analysis of complex situations.
关键不是更多数据，而是处理数据的心智模型和分析工具；并质疑情报界信息的可信度。
原文说：“情报界对许多问题的反应是收集更多信息，尽管分析人员往往已经拥有超出消化能力的信息。他们真正需要的是更有用的信息——主要是来自知情内部人士的可靠人力情报——以帮助做出好的决策。或者他们需要更准确的心智模型和更好的分析工具，来梳理、理解并充分利用现有模糊且矛盾的信息。”我认为关键在后者：即使获得更多数据，除非你愿意且能够处理它，否则它不会变成有用的信息。另外，我们“外部人”很难判断这些概念对情报界的价值，因为我们只知道他们想让我们知道的。他们是在下一盘大棋。当我听到“NSA说……”或“CIA说……”时，我几乎认为毫无意义。情报界毕竟从事的是误导性信息业务。附言：我认为“思考思考”的恰当术语是元认知，CIA避免使用这个正确术语让我觉得奇怪。
chiefalchemist查看英文原文
> "The reaction of the Intelligence Community to many problems is to collect more information, even though analysts in many cases already have more information than they can digest. What analysts need is more truly useful information--mostly reliable HUMINT from knowledgeable insiders--to help them make good decisions. Or they need a more accurate mental model and better analytical tools to help them sort through, make sense of, and get the most out of the available ambiguous and conflicting information." I would think the key is the latter. That is, even if you get more data it does not become __useful__ information unless you're willing and able to process it. That aside, it's difficult, if not impossible for us "on the outside" to judge the value of these concept to the IC as we only get to know what the IC wants us to know. They're playing the long game. They're playing chess. Maybe it's just me but when I hear a news story (or a friend / colleague) that says "The NSA said..." or the "CIA said..." I accept those as close to meaningless. The IC is, afterall, in the misinformation business. p.s. I believe the proper term for tbinking about thinking is meta-cognition. I find it odd that the CIA would avoid using the proper term.
链接只是书中一章，整本书都值得阅读。
需要说明的是，这个链接是理查德·J·豪尔《情报分析心理学》全书中的一章。目录在此……粗略一看目录，整本书都值得一看。
inetsee查看英文原文
In case it's not clear, the link is to one chapter in a larger book titled "Psychology of Intelligence Analysis" by Richards J. Heuer, Jr. The table of contents is here https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/psychology-of-intelligence-analysis A brief look at the table of contents suggest that the whole book is worth looking at.
推荐同作者更近的著作和RAND报告，系统介绍结构化分析技术。
同一作者的《情报分析结构化分析技术》一书更新，深入细节和应用。书中涵盖许多偏差和注意力现象、预防或缓解工具、解决问题的可视化技术（如时间线等），并附有若干示例。它还解释了从业者所处的环境：信息可能稀缺、矛盾，或出于偶然，或由想要混淆视听的行动者故意设计。这里有一份RAND报告……
Jugurtha查看英文原文
The book "Structured Analytic Techniques for Intelligence Analysis" by the same author is more recent and goes into details and applications. They go over many biases and attentional phenomena, tools to prevent or mitigate, visualization techniques to address problems (timelines, etc.) with several examples. It also goes into explaining the context that practitioners evolve in a context where information can be scarce, contradictory either by happenstance or by design by actors who want to confuse. Here's a RAND report titled "Assessing the Value of Structured Analytic Techniques in the U.S. Intelligence Community". - [0]: https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1400/RR1408/RAND_RR1408.pdf
历次讨论
同类还值得读
保持你的身份认同足够小
Keep Your Identity Small (2009)
Paul Graham 2009 年的一篇短文：人一旦把某个话题当成自己身份的一部分（宗教、政治、编程语言皆然），讨论就会退化成站队和争吵，因为此时争论的不再是事实，而是"我是谁…
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021paulgraham.com编辑精选苏格拉底式教学法：通过提问而非讲授来教学
The Socratic Method: Teaching by Asking Instead of by Telling
记录了作者用纯提问的方式，引导一群小学生从零推导出二进制计数法的课堂实验，展示了苏格拉底式教学法的惊人效果。
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2011–2022garlikov.com你不能说的话
What You Can't Say (2004)
Paul Graham 2004 年的经典文章，探讨那些因道德时尚而不能公开说出的观点。
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2014–2022paulgraham.com编辑精选龙暴君的寓言（2005）
The Fable of the Dragon-Tyrant (2005)
哲学家 Nick Bostrom 于 2005 年写的一则寓言：一条每天吞噬数千人的巨龙（隐喻死亡与衰老）长期被人类当作不可抗拒的自然规律接受，直到有人提出并最终用导弹将其杀死，…
思考与写作上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021nickbostrom.com编辑精选现实有着惊人的细节量
Reality has a surprising amount of detail (2017)
2017 年的博文指出，现实远比我们以为的充满细节：我们习惯用简化的心智模型看世界，直到真正动手做事（比如作者举的造楼梯例子）才发现处处是未曾预料的细节。
思考与写作上首页 4 次 · 2018–2025johnsalvatier.org编辑精选