w*m
2 楼
沙发
勇哥生快
勇哥生快
w*m
3 楼
2012 多发片片
b*e
4 楼
多谢lily:)
新年一定努力多拍好片给大家批判 哈哈！
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
新年一定努力多拍好片给大家批判 哈哈！
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
b*e
5 楼
谢谢蚊兄:)
【在 w**m 的大作中提到】
: 沙发
: 勇哥生快
【在 w**m 的大作中提到】
: 沙发
: 勇哥生快
g*y
6 楼
恩，生日快乐！！！
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢蚊兄:)
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢蚊兄:)
b*e
7 楼
谢谢小主儿:)
哈哈 这词从贞环传学的
【在 g***y 的大作中提到】
: 恩，生日快乐！！！
哈哈 这词从贞环传学的
【在 g***y 的大作中提到】
: 恩，生日快乐！！！
g*y
8 楼
没看过
那大主儿是谁？
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢小主儿:)
: 哈哈 这词从贞环传学的
那大主儿是谁？
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢小主儿:)
: 哈哈 这词从贞环传学的
b*e
9 楼
。。。好像没大主儿
如果必须有的话，我猜是皇上
【在 g***y 的大作中提到】
: 没看过
: 那大主儿是谁？
如果必须有的话，我猜是皇上
【在 g***y 的大作中提到】
: 没看过
: 那大主儿是谁？
g*y
10 楼
哦，那还差不多
不然你再找个别人叫大主儿我就亏了。。。
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 。。。好像没大主儿
: 如果必须有的话，我猜是皇上
不然你再找个别人叫大主儿我就亏了。。。
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 。。。好像没大主儿
: 如果必须有的话，我猜是皇上
b*e
11 楼
lol 你还真精明。。。。
我去睡觉先，你好好玩:)
【在 g***y 的大作中提到】
: 哦，那还差不多
: 不然你再找个别人叫大主儿我就亏了。。。
我去睡觉先，你好好玩:)
【在 g***y 的大作中提到】
: 哦，那还差不多
: 不然你再找个别人叫大主儿我就亏了。。。
j*n
12 楼
勇哥快生
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: lol 你还真精明。。。。
: 我去睡觉先，你好好玩:)
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: lol 你还真精明。。。。
: 我去睡觉先，你好好玩:)
s*n
13 楼
原来差了十天。。。。。。
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
g*y
14 楼
当然！！
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: lol 你还真精明。。。。
: 我去睡觉先，你好好玩:)
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: lol 你还真精明。。。。
: 我去睡觉先，你好好玩:)
c*e
15 楼
生日快乐， 这歌我也喜欢。
a*a
16 楼
哇，男魔羯
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
b*k
17 楼
祝福brave生日happy！
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
b*k
18 楼
对了，版上还有学术也是摩羯，是不是生日也快到了还是已经过了？
【在 w**m 的大作中提到】
: 沙发
: 勇哥生快
【在 w**m 的大作中提到】
: 沙发
: 勇哥生快
i*l
19 楼
你也有小本本了？
祝阿勇妻妾成群模特成群镜头成群
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
祝阿勇妻妾成群模特成群镜头成群
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
l*r
20 楼
阿勇节棍！
生日快乐
【在 i**l 的大作中提到】
: 你也有小本本了？
: 祝阿勇妻妾成群模特成群镜头成群
生日快乐
【在 i**l 的大作中提到】
: 你也有小本本了？
: 祝阿勇妻妾成群模特成群镜头成群
l*m
21 楼
Happy birthday to you and how old are you....
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 多谢lily:)
: 新年一定努力多拍好片给大家批判 哈哈！
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 多谢lily:)
: 新年一定努力多拍好片给大家批判 哈哈！
T*n
22 楼
happy BD! 好歌好深情
b*s
23 楼
生日快乐！有二十五了吧……
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
b*s
24 楼
摩羯男……
原来还以为摩羯是什么怪兽呢，原来就是一只羊……
【在 a*****a 的大作中提到】
: 哇，男魔羯
原来还以为摩羯是什么怪兽呢，原来就是一只羊……
【在 a*****a 的大作中提到】
: 哇，男魔羯
l*r
25 楼
每次看到这俩字，我就想到羊蝎子
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 摩羯男……
: 原来还以为摩羯是什么怪兽呢，原来就是一只羊……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 摩羯男……
: 原来还以为摩羯是什么怪兽呢，原来就是一只羊……
b*s
26 楼
祝阿勇
妻妾成群
群模满怀
镜头成堆
SSD如云
【在 i**l 的大作中提到】
: 你也有小本本了？
: 祝阿勇妻妾成群模特成群镜头成群
妻妾成群
群模满怀
镜头成堆
SSD如云
【在 i**l 的大作中提到】
: 你也有小本本了？
: 祝阿勇妻妾成群模特成群镜头成群
b*s
27 楼
wPad到底是什么法宝？
【在 T*******n 的大作中提到】
: happy BD! 好歌好深情
【在 T*******n 的大作中提到】
: happy BD! 好歌好深情
s*s
28 楼
生日快乐
lily有心了，今天还有包子不
lily有心了，今天还有包子不
l*k
29 楼
大主当然是皇后啦
今天生日怎么过？
有照片跟我们share没？
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 。。。好像没大主儿
: 如果必须有的话，我猜是皇上
今天生日怎么过？
有照片跟我们share没？
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 。。。好像没大主儿
: 如果必须有的话，我猜是皇上
l*k
30 楼
wh发
我已经私下给brave蛋糕了
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: lily有心了，今天还有包子不
我已经私下给brave蛋糕了
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: lily有心了，今天还有包子不
b*e
31 楼
..努力中:)
【在 j******n 的大作中提到】
: 勇哥快生
【在 j******n 的大作中提到】
: 勇哥快生
b*e
32 楼
谢谢:)
【在 c****e 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐， 这歌我也喜欢。
【在 c****e 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐， 这歌我也喜欢。
b*e
33 楼
谢谢花花：）
【在 b*********k 的大作中提到】
: 祝福brave生日happy！
【在 b*********k 的大作中提到】
: 祝福brave生日happy！
b*e
34 楼
这个是乐夫人吗？:)
【在 i**l 的大作中提到】
: 你也有小本本了？
: 祝阿勇妻妾成群模特成群镜头成群
【在 i**l 的大作中提到】
: 你也有小本本了？
: 祝阿勇妻妾成群模特成群镜头成群
b*e
35 楼
谢谢牛筋兄:)
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 阿勇节棍！
: 生日快乐
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 阿勇节棍！
: 生日快乐
b*e
36 楼
ha不才 今年18
【在 l******m 的大作中提到】
: Happy birthday to you and how old are you....
【在 l******m 的大作中提到】
: Happy birthday to you and how old are you....
b*e
37 楼
谢谢:)
【在 T*******n 的大作中提到】
: happy BD! 好歌好深情
【在 T*******n 的大作中提到】
: happy BD! 好歌好深情
b*e
38 楼
哪有，钱财有25
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！有二十五了吧……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！有二十五了吧……
s*n
39 楼
别以为过生日就能偷懒了，哼哼，赶快干活！
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/LeisureTime/427673.html
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢:)
http://www.mitbbs.com/article_t/LeisureTime/427673.html
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢:)
b*e
40 楼
哈 徒弟来了，有包子。在wh帖子统一发吧，我也给版面捐蛋糕
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: lily有心了，今天还有包子不
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: lily有心了，今天还有包子不
l*m
41 楼
大宝天天见的结果？
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: ha不才 今年18
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: ha不才 今年18
b*e
42 楼
还没想好呢，估计去个club order几个lab dance啥的 哈哈
照片，看看吧，有好的就share
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 大主当然是皇后啦
: 今天生日怎么过？
: 有照片跟我们share没？
照片，看看吧，有好的就share
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 大主当然是皇后啦
: 今天生日怎么过？
: 有照片跟我们share没？
b*s
43 楼
$25 m吧……
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 哪有，钱财有25
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 哪有，钱财有25
b*e
44 楼
en 包子就劳烦版主们帮我下，我现在去转帐
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: wh发
: 我已经私下给brave蛋糕了
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: wh发
: 我已经私下给brave蛋糕了
b*s
45 楼
不知道原声原来是正太……
【在 l******m 的大作中提到】
: 大宝天天见的结果？
【在 l******m 的大作中提到】
: 大宝天天见的结果？
s*n
46 楼
坚决傍！
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: $25 m吧……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: $25 m吧……
p*r
47 楼
同祝同祝
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
b*e
48 楼
罗莉好不好
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 不知道原声原来是正太……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 不知道原声原来是正太……
b*e
49 楼
小素 也不给叔发点人像看看:)
【在 s***n 的大作中提到】
: 坚决傍！
【在 s***n 的大作中提到】
: 坚决傍！
g*y
50 楼
生日快乐！
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 摩羯男……
: 原来还以为摩羯是什么怪兽呢，原来就是一只羊……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 摩羯男……
: 原来还以为摩羯是什么怪兽呢，原来就是一只羊……
b*e
51 楼
谢谢 鸡哥:)
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！
w*s
52 楼
生日快乐！
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
wh
53 楼
哎呀我来呀……你留着包子以后还有机会发呀，比如升官发财的时候……哈哈哈。
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: en 包子就劳烦版主们帮我下，我现在去转帐
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: en 包子就劳烦版主们帮我下，我现在去转帐
wh
54 楼
喜洋洋是绵羊吧。摩羯听说是山羊？我搞不清，可能记反……
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！
b*s
55 楼
摩羯是山羊……
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 喜洋洋是绵羊吧。摩羯听说是山羊？我搞不清，可能记反……
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 喜洋洋是绵羊吧。摩羯听说是山羊？我搞不清，可能记反……
b*e
56 楼
lol算上你的了，你可别反悔:)
我也就是往蛋糕里面+点草莓巧克力:)
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 哎呀我来呀……你留着包子以后还有机会发呀，比如升官发财的时候……哈哈哈。
我也就是往蛋糕里面+点草莓巧克力:)
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 哎呀我来呀……你留着包子以后还有机会发呀，比如升官发财的时候……哈哈哈。
g*y
57 楼
你们太认真了。今天你一定手忍住了，没给我整个什么llama出来。
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 摩羯是山羊……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 摩羯是山羊……
b*s
58 楼
不是llama，是Capricorn……
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 你们太认真了。今天你一定手忍住了，没给我整个什么llama出来。
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 你们太认真了。今天你一定手忍住了，没给我整个什么llama出来。
g*y
59 楼
你不觉得capricorn不够exotic? Llama多好，版上见过的应该不多吧，以我小人之心揣
测。
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 不是llama，是Capricorn……
测。
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 不是llama，是Capricorn……
l*r
60 楼
闹不清楚这俩的区别
好多petting zoo里面那个，看来不是llama?
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 你不觉得capricorn不够exotic? Llama多好，版上见过的应该不多吧，以我小人之心揣
: 测。
好多petting zoo里面那个，看来不是llama?
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 你不觉得capricorn不够exotic? Llama多好，版上见过的应该不多吧，以我小人之心揣
: 测。
b*s
61 楼
动物园里常见，不就是南美的家畜吗……
中国俗称草泥马……
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 你不觉得capricorn不够exotic? Llama多好，版上见过的应该不多吧，以我小人之心揣
: 测。
中国俗称草泥马……
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 你不觉得capricorn不够exotic? Llama多好，版上见过的应该不多吧，以我小人之心揣
: 测。
b*s
62 楼
就是那个，草泥马……
心揣
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 闹不清楚这俩的区别
: 好多petting zoo里面那个，看来不是llama?
心揣
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 闹不清楚这俩的区别
: 好多petting zoo里面那个，看来不是llama?
g*y
63 楼
这个当pet也太大了吧，大的跟骆驼差不多。刚查了wiki, bos是对的，这就是著名的草
泥马的动物原型，网上商家迅速觅得一片商机。
我是在农贸市场第一次看到，厂家来卖Llama毛编的各种衣服帽子，然后牵了两头来做
形象大使。看上去非常卡通，人见人爱。
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 闹不清楚这俩的区别
: 好多petting zoo里面那个，看来不是llama?
泥马的动物原型，网上商家迅速觅得一片商机。
我是在农贸市场第一次看到，厂家来卖Llama毛编的各种衣服帽子，然后牵了两头来做
形象大使。看上去非常卡通，人见人爱。
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 闹不清楚这俩的区别
: 好多petting zoo里面那个，看来不是llama?
b*s
64 楼
petting动物园里是有这个的，我看过无数次……
有人养长颈鹿当pet的……
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 这个当pet也太大了吧，大的跟骆驼差不多。刚查了wiki, bos是对的，这就是著名的草
: 泥马的动物原型，网上商家迅速觅得一片商机。
: 我是在农贸市场第一次看到，厂家来卖Llama毛编的各种衣服帽子，然后牵了两头来做
: 形象大使。看上去非常卡通，人见人爱。
有人养长颈鹿当pet的……
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 这个当pet也太大了吧，大的跟骆驼差不多。刚查了wiki, bos是对的，这就是著名的草
: 泥马的动物原型，网上商家迅速觅得一片商机。
: 我是在农贸市场第一次看到，厂家来卖Llama毛编的各种衣服帽子，然后牵了两头来做
: 形象大使。看上去非常卡通，人见人爱。
l*r
65 楼
我都是在farm的petting zoo那块堆见着好像
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 这个当pet也太大了吧，大的跟骆驼差不多。刚查了wiki, bos是对的，这就是著名的草
: 泥马的动物原型，网上商家迅速觅得一片商机。
: 我是在农贸市场第一次看到，厂家来卖Llama毛编的各种衣服帽子，然后牵了两头来做
: 形象大使。看上去非常卡通，人见人爱。
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: 这个当pet也太大了吧，大的跟骆驼差不多。刚查了wiki, bos是对的，这就是著名的草
: 泥马的动物原型，网上商家迅速觅得一片商机。
: 我是在农贸市场第一次看到，厂家来卖Llama毛编的各种衣服帽子，然后牵了两头来做
: 形象大使。看上去非常卡通，人见人爱。
l*k
66 楼
我家门口的一块空地上就养了无数马和拉马
每天都能看到
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 我都是在farm的petting zoo那块堆见着好像
每天都能看到
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 我都是在farm的petting zoo那块堆见着好像
l*r
67 楼
豪宅啊
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 我家门口的一块空地上就养了无数马和拉马
: 每天都能看到
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 我家门口的一块空地上就养了无数马和拉马
: 每天都能看到
l*k
68 楼
咋不是穷乡僻壤？
哎呀，好烦呀，累死了
还一堆作业，不想做，咋整？
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 豪宅啊
哎呀，好烦呀，累死了
还一堆作业，不想做，咋整？
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 豪宅啊
b*s
69 楼
阔佬啊……
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 豪宅啊
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 豪宅啊
b*s
70 楼
下网做作业去！
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 咋不是穷乡僻壤？
: 哎呀，好烦呀，累死了
: 还一堆作业，不想做，咋整？
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 咋不是穷乡僻壤？
: 哎呀，好烦呀，累死了
: 还一堆作业，不想做，咋整？
l*r
71 楼
打牌发包子
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 咋不是穷乡僻壤？
: 哎呀，好烦呀，累死了
: 还一堆作业，不想做，咋整？
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 咋不是穷乡僻壤？
: 哎呀，好烦呀，累死了
: 还一堆作业，不想做，咋整？
l*k
72 楼
我觉得我这是一种病
越是忙，就越不想动，想偷懒
对了，brave的心理phd徒弟不知道能不能help下？
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 下网做作业去！
越是忙，就越不想动，想偷懒
对了，brave的心理phd徒弟不知道能不能help下？
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 下网做作业去！
l*k
73 楼
我老板也可能会突然出现在我身后的。。。
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 打牌发包子
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 打牌发包子
g*y
74 楼
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrastination
让bos帮你采药吧，他什么都知道。
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得我这是一种病
: 越是忙，就越不想动，想偷懒
: 对了，brave的心理phd徒弟不知道能不能help下？
让bos帮你采药吧，他什么都知道。
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得我这是一种病
: 越是忙，就越不想动，想偷懒
: 对了，brave的心理phd徒弟不知道能不能help下？
l*y
75 楼
happy birthday!
l*k
76 楼
anxiety呀，好像挺符合的
采药这个bos就肯定不如我啦，哈哈哈
我周末上班的时候顺手试试anti-anxiety的试试先
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrastination
: 让bos帮你采药吧，他什么都知道。
采药这个bos就肯定不如我啦，哈哈哈
我周末上班的时候顺手试试anti-anxiety的试试先
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrastination
: 让bos帮你采药吧，他什么都知道。
b*s
77 楼
我跟你一样靠放狗，怎么会什么都知道！◎＃％……
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrastination
: 让bos帮你采药吧，他什么都知道。
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrastination
: 让bos帮你采药吧，他什么都知道。
g*y
78 楼
你读那么多书，就算放狗，我也输在起跑线上了。我都不知道该把狗往哪个方向放。
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 我跟你一样靠放狗，怎么会什么都知道！◎＃％……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 我跟你一样靠放狗，怎么会什么都知道！◎＃％……
b*e
79 楼
呵呵 这个是典型的一种轻度抑郁症表现
好像心理上有个啥名次。。。。我忘了，就是啥都拖延着。我一直有这病，现在还没好
，估计你被我传染了。
治病很简单，把网线砍断，router邮寄给我:)
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得我这是一种病
: 越是忙，就越不想动，想偷懒
: 对了，brave的心理phd徒弟不知道能不能help下？
好像心理上有个啥名次。。。。我忘了，就是啥都拖延着。我一直有这病，现在还没好
，估计你被我传染了。
治病很简单，把网线砍断，router邮寄给我:)
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得我这是一种病
: 越是忙，就越不想动，想偷懒
: 对了，brave的心理phd徒弟不知道能不能help下？
b*e
80 楼
赞专业 就是这个词
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrastination
: 让bos帮你采药吧，他什么都知道。
【在 g**********y 的大作中提到】
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrastination
: 让bos帮你采药吧，他什么都知道。
i*t
81 楼
生日快乐！建议以后多拍人体艺术照。
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
b*e
82 楼
谢谢:)
【在 l**********y 的大作中提到】
: happy birthday!
【在 l**********y 的大作中提到】
: happy birthday!
b*e
83 楼
en 我也是这莫想的，以后就牺牲自己，给大家娱乐
【在 i*********t 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！建议以后多拍人体艺术照。
【在 i*********t 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！建议以后多拍人体艺术照。
l*r
84 楼
强烈顶
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: en 我也是这莫想的，以后就牺牲自己，给大家娱乐
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: en 我也是这莫想的，以后就牺牲自己，给大家娱乐
b*s
85 楼
生日快乐，还有，少来那些标题党的走光照……
【在 i*********t 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！建议以后多拍人体艺术照。
【在 i*********t 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐！建议以后多拍人体艺术照。
l*r
86 楼
恩，还有床罩，让俺点也不是不点也不是
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐，还有，少来那些标题党的走光照……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐，还有，少来那些标题党的走光照……
l*k
87 楼
别这里贫了
我有问题在西北问你呢
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 恩，还有床罩，让俺点也不是不点也不是
我有问题在西北问你呢
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 恩，还有床罩，让俺点也不是不点也不是
b*s
88 楼
问题还要在西北问，射天狼呢……
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 别这里贫了
: 我有问题在西北问你呢
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 别这里贫了
: 我有问题在西北问你呢
i*t
89 楼
顶啥？他大概是说自拍。。
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 强烈顶
【在 l*r 的大作中提到】
: 强烈顶
l*r
90 楼
自拍也行啊，以后阿勇成名了
我就给他翻腾出来
【在 i*********t 的大作中提到】
: 顶啥？他大概是说自拍。。
我就给他翻腾出来
【在 i*********t 的大作中提到】
: 顶啥？他大概是说自拍。。
wh
91 楼
哈哈。这个采药说得很好玩。
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 我跟你一样靠放狗，怎么会什么都知道！◎＃％……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 我跟你一样靠放狗，怎么会什么都知道！◎＃％……
M*N
92 楼
勇哥生快！看着不像摩羯阿~
送上一个女巫店的摩羯座2012星运，看着玩啦
女巫店2012年12星座年度运势之：摩羯座
年度密码：低调，爆发力。
今年是摩羯座低调、潜行的一年,如果必须用一个成语来形容，那就是“锦衣夜行”。
舒缓成为今年的主题，它可以帮助你进入一个宁静，和平的气氛。您可以在一年的反省
和自我调节，精神追求是这一年的中心思想。
对摩羯座们来说，未来一年，可说如人饮水，冷暖自知。面对自己要从热闹激情的繁华
红尘，走向波澜不兴的寻常人间，心情不可谓没有失落。锦衣夜行比较是今年的状态，
但说不好听一点，今年不是摩羯座的大年，事业虽然是主题，但进阶机会不大；正能量
缺乏，玩乐心大的人还比较好，如果是一味正经工作，努力向上的人，今年恐怕不算太
开心。
主运落在工作，最大的痛点则在理财投资等金钱议题。
和去年相较，事业能见度和知名度大幅滑落，虽然在经营管理和执行力上仍有相当不错
的成绩，但基本也只能算的上是稳定基本盘，绝对没有什么大的突破，就更别提开拓新
的领域了。
就生活层面和个人部分来说，今年的摩羯座比较不在竞争状态，所以一切的一切是以躲
，让，回避为最好；任何正面冲突都对摩羯座不利，自己也不够自信，因此赢面普遍不
大。
职场运势
送给今年的摩羯座一句话：行到水穷处，坐看云起时。
很多时候，摩羯或许就是太认真，太固执，太坚持了，而这样的坚持最终或许会害了你
们自己；职场走到无路可走的时候，不要急着给自己找出路，不要急着对得起自己的手
下、工作人员，适当的停下来，坐下来等，给自己时间真空，或许，出路就在这里。
今年的事业可说由绚烂归于平淡；这样的日子对摩羯座来说当然不算好过。上半年对事
业舞台上的反复测试，但每一个尝试均进展不顺利，小人横行，多嘴者众，但如论如何
，不管在何种环境里，摩羯还是称职优秀的工作角色，而且一贯以来的人缘都不错，只
要能学会收放，就一切还好。
财务运势
直接明白的告诉你，这一年，如果你是一个到处投资，买股票买期货炒房子的摩羯座的
话，你就会焦头烂额，烦都烦死了，四处起火。但如果你就是一个小老百姓，普通学生
，踏踏实实安安稳稳的过日子的话，今年的财务，算很不错，相当小康。在财务问题上
面行动力超强的这段时间，行事风格反而更趋成熟稳定，对投资的思考跟经验的累绩融
会贯通，因此生活的经营也显得相当有方向感。创意十足，并有足够的能力彻底执行，
小小的财运是不错的，不需要太担心。如果是投资客，大手笔，那今年不是你的大年，
不如守势为主，我的建议是这样。
爱情运势
摩羯座的爱情，在这一年，将是重新开始的一年。是的，那些拖拖拉拉一直没有终点也
看不到幸福的乱七八糟的爱情，你今年决定不要它了，一切，重新来过吧。
因此，就爱情来说，摩羯座在2012年里是充满勇气，充满欣喜的力量的一年，这样 的
摩羯座是应该被祝福被鼓励的，上半年邂逅运一般，一切平平常常；但8月之后，你的
爱情春天来了，比较容易在工作场合邂逅自己下一任的最爱。而对于已婚的摩羯座来说
，两个人的相处之道你已经牢牢掌握，也没太多期待值，那么，就耐心积累你们的爱情
生活吧。平静，也是一种难得的幸福。
健康运势
呈现大好大坏两种极端。长久以来一直疏于积极照顾的健康，开始有余力关心，不少人
开始增加运动、养生、休闲的生活比重，让操劳的身体偶而也送厂保养一下。
开运法器：红色玛瑙配银。红色玛瑙对应今年摩羯座命宫的低潮，提升稳定感觉，银为
过滤法物，滤掉侵袭、胡思乱想、杂质与小人靠近。
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
送上一个女巫店的摩羯座2012星运，看着玩啦
女巫店2012年12星座年度运势之：摩羯座
年度密码：低调，爆发力。
今年是摩羯座低调、潜行的一年,如果必须用一个成语来形容，那就是“锦衣夜行”。
舒缓成为今年的主题，它可以帮助你进入一个宁静，和平的气氛。您可以在一年的反省
和自我调节，精神追求是这一年的中心思想。
对摩羯座们来说，未来一年，可说如人饮水，冷暖自知。面对自己要从热闹激情的繁华
红尘，走向波澜不兴的寻常人间，心情不可谓没有失落。锦衣夜行比较是今年的状态，
但说不好听一点，今年不是摩羯座的大年，事业虽然是主题，但进阶机会不大；正能量
缺乏，玩乐心大的人还比较好，如果是一味正经工作，努力向上的人，今年恐怕不算太
开心。
主运落在工作，最大的痛点则在理财投资等金钱议题。
和去年相较，事业能见度和知名度大幅滑落，虽然在经营管理和执行力上仍有相当不错
的成绩，但基本也只能算的上是稳定基本盘，绝对没有什么大的突破，就更别提开拓新
的领域了。
就生活层面和个人部分来说，今年的摩羯座比较不在竞争状态，所以一切的一切是以躲
，让，回避为最好；任何正面冲突都对摩羯座不利，自己也不够自信，因此赢面普遍不
大。
职场运势
送给今年的摩羯座一句话：行到水穷处，坐看云起时。
很多时候，摩羯或许就是太认真，太固执，太坚持了，而这样的坚持最终或许会害了你
们自己；职场走到无路可走的时候，不要急着给自己找出路，不要急着对得起自己的手
下、工作人员，适当的停下来，坐下来等，给自己时间真空，或许，出路就在这里。
今年的事业可说由绚烂归于平淡；这样的日子对摩羯座来说当然不算好过。上半年对事
业舞台上的反复测试，但每一个尝试均进展不顺利，小人横行，多嘴者众，但如论如何
，不管在何种环境里，摩羯还是称职优秀的工作角色，而且一贯以来的人缘都不错，只
要能学会收放，就一切还好。
财务运势
直接明白的告诉你，这一年，如果你是一个到处投资，买股票买期货炒房子的摩羯座的
话，你就会焦头烂额，烦都烦死了，四处起火。但如果你就是一个小老百姓，普通学生
，踏踏实实安安稳稳的过日子的话，今年的财务，算很不错，相当小康。在财务问题上
面行动力超强的这段时间，行事风格反而更趋成熟稳定，对投资的思考跟经验的累绩融
会贯通，因此生活的经营也显得相当有方向感。创意十足，并有足够的能力彻底执行，
小小的财运是不错的，不需要太担心。如果是投资客，大手笔，那今年不是你的大年，
不如守势为主，我的建议是这样。
爱情运势
摩羯座的爱情，在这一年，将是重新开始的一年。是的，那些拖拖拉拉一直没有终点也
看不到幸福的乱七八糟的爱情，你今年决定不要它了，一切，重新来过吧。
因此，就爱情来说，摩羯座在2012年里是充满勇气，充满欣喜的力量的一年，这样 的
摩羯座是应该被祝福被鼓励的，上半年邂逅运一般，一切平平常常；但8月之后，你的
爱情春天来了，比较容易在工作场合邂逅自己下一任的最爱。而对于已婚的摩羯座来说
，两个人的相处之道你已经牢牢掌握，也没太多期待值，那么，就耐心积累你们的爱情
生活吧。平静，也是一种难得的幸福。
健康运势
呈现大好大坏两种极端。长久以来一直疏于积极照顾的健康，开始有余力关心，不少人
开始增加运动、养生、休闲的生活比重，让操劳的身体偶而也送厂保养一下。
开运法器：红色玛瑙配银。红色玛瑙对应今年摩羯座命宫的低潮，提升稳定感觉，银为
过滤法物，滤掉侵袭、胡思乱想、杂质与小人靠近。
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
s*s
93 楼
procrastination...你完了，世纪绝症
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得我这是一种病
: 越是忙，就越不想动，想偷懒
: 对了，brave的心理phd徒弟不知道能不能help下？
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得我这是一种病
: 越是忙，就越不想动，想偷懒
: 对了，brave的心理phd徒弟不知道能不能help下？
b*e
94 楼
...蒙古大夫，你得想办法让病人长久的掏钱来见你。
不是一句话就把人家直接打发走断自己财路...
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: procrastination...你完了，世纪绝症
不是一句话就把人家直接打发走断自己财路...
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: procrastination...你完了，世纪绝症
b*e
95 楼
谢谢娜娜，虽然我一贯不迷信封建会道门，不过这次还看到不少贴切的:)
"送给今年的摩羯座一句话：行到水穷处，坐看云起时。"
最喜欢这句了，估计我走到山穷水尽之时，也就否极泰来，我得继续忍:)
【在 M****N 的大作中提到】
: 勇哥生快！看着不像摩羯阿~
: 送上一个女巫店的摩羯座2012星运，看着玩啦
: 女巫店2012年12星座年度运势之：摩羯座
: 年度密码：低调，爆发力。
: 今年是摩羯座低调、潜行的一年,如果必须用一个成语来形容，那就是“锦衣夜行”。
: 舒缓成为今年的主题，它可以帮助你进入一个宁静，和平的气氛。您可以在一年的反省
: 和自我调节，精神追求是这一年的中心思想。
: 对摩羯座们来说，未来一年，可说如人饮水，冷暖自知。面对自己要从热闹激情的繁华
: 红尘，走向波澜不兴的寻常人间，心情不可谓没有失落。锦衣夜行比较是今年的状态，
: 但说不好听一点，今年不是摩羯座的大年，事业虽然是主题，但进阶机会不大；正能量
"送给今年的摩羯座一句话：行到水穷处，坐看云起时。"
最喜欢这句了，估计我走到山穷水尽之时，也就否极泰来，我得继续忍:)
【在 M****N 的大作中提到】
: 勇哥生快！看着不像摩羯阿~
: 送上一个女巫店的摩羯座2012星运，看着玩啦
: 女巫店2012年12星座年度运势之：摩羯座
: 年度密码：低调，爆发力。
: 今年是摩羯座低调、潜行的一年,如果必须用一个成语来形容，那就是“锦衣夜行”。
: 舒缓成为今年的主题，它可以帮助你进入一个宁静，和平的气氛。您可以在一年的反省
: 和自我调节，精神追求是这一年的中心思想。
: 对摩羯座们来说，未来一年，可说如人饮水，冷暖自知。面对自己要从热闹激情的繁华
: 红尘，走向波澜不兴的寻常人间，心情不可谓没有失落。锦衣夜行比较是今年的状态，
: 但说不好听一点，今年不是摩羯座的大年，事业虽然是主题，但进阶机会不大；正能量
l*k
96 楼
无药可治？
换个角度，也可以是无药自愈的：）
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: procrastination...你完了，世纪绝症
换个角度，也可以是无药自愈的：）
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: procrastination...你完了，世纪绝症
l*k
97 楼
若兮姑姑万安～
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢娜娜，虽然我一贯不迷信封建会道门，不过这次还看到不少贴切的:)
: "送给今年的摩羯座一句话：行到水穷处，坐看云起时。"
: 最喜欢这句了，估计我走到山穷水尽之时，也就否极泰来，我得继续忍:)
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢娜娜，虽然我一贯不迷信封建会道门，不过这次还看到不少贴切的:)
: "送给今年的摩羯座一句话：行到水穷处，坐看云起时。"
: 最喜欢这句了，估计我走到山穷水尽之时，也就否极泰来，我得继续忍:)
b*e
98 楼
看你这高兴，肯定是作业写完了:)
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 无药可治？
: 换个角度，也可以是无药自愈的：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 无药可治？
: 换个角度，也可以是无药自愈的：）
l*k
99 楼
就是就是，哈哈哈
还有就是忍过去了。。。你知道我说啥赛：）
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 看你这高兴，肯定是作业写完了:)
还有就是忍过去了。。。你知道我说啥赛：）
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 看你这高兴，肯定是作业写完了:)
b*e
100 楼
阿 你刚才说的是弱西
现在说啥 我就不知道了...
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 就是就是，哈哈哈
: 还有就是忍过去了。。。你知道我说啥赛：）
现在说啥 我就不知道了...
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 就是就是，哈哈哈
: 还有就是忍过去了。。。你知道我说啥赛：）
l*k
101 楼
你这记性
下午的马甲贴
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 阿 你刚才说的是弱西
: 现在说啥 我就不知道了...
下午的马甲贴
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 阿 你刚才说的是弱西
: 现在说啥 我就不知道了...
b*e
102 楼
lol 彻底忘了 。。。
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 你这记性
: 下午的马甲贴
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 你这记性
: 下午的马甲贴
l*k
103 楼
你。。。。。
算了
你生日嘛
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: lol 彻底忘了 。。。
算了
你生日嘛
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: lol 彻底忘了 。。。
b*s
104 楼
去年的New Yorker上有一篇长文就是这个话题的，有木有人也读过？
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: procrastination...你完了，世纪绝症
【在 s******s 的大作中提到】
: procrastination...你完了，世纪绝症
l*i
105 楼
读了个开头，总想以后再找机会读，结果就一直拖下来...
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 去年的New Yorker上有一篇长文就是这个话题的，有木有人也读过？
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 去年的New Yorker上有一篇长文就是这个话题的，有木有人也读过？
z*a
106 楼
求总结～
或者贴个原文吧
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 去年的New Yorker上有一篇长文就是这个话题的，有木有人也读过？
或者贴个原文吧
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 去年的New Yorker上有一篇长文就是这个话题的，有木有人也读过？
b*s
107 楼
让我找找，这New Yorker不是所有的文章都上网的，很黑……
【在 z***a 的大作中提到】
: 求总结～
: 或者贴个原文吧
【在 z***a 的大作中提到】
: 求总结～
: 或者贴个原文吧
b*s
108 楼
居然找到了：
这个Surowiecki老是写经济专栏的……
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2010/10/11/101011cr
Later
What does procrastination tell us about ourselves?
by James Surowiecki October 11, 2010
Procrastination interests philosophers because of its underlying
irrationality.
Some years ago, the economist George Akerlof found himself faced with a
simple task: mailing a box of clothes from India, where he was living, to
the United States. The clothes belonged to his friend and colleague Joseph
Stiglitz, who had left them behind when visiting, so Akerlof was eager to
send the box off. But there was a problem. The combination of Indian
bureaucracy and what Akerlof called “my own ineptitude in such matters”
meant that doing so was going to be a hassle—indeed, he estimated that it
would take an entire workday. So he put off dealing with it, week after week
. This went on for more than eight months, and it was only shortly before
Akerlof himself returned home that he managed to solve his problem: another
friend happened to be sending some things back to the U.S., and Akerlof was
able to add Stiglitz’s clothes to the shipment. Given the vagaries of
intercontinental mail, it’s possible that Akerlof made it back to the
States before Stiglitz’s shirts did.
There’s something comforting about this story: even Nobel-winning
economists procrastinate! Many of us go through life with an array of undone
tasks, large and small, nibbling at our conscience. But Akerlof saw the
experience, for all its familiarity, as mysterious. He genuinely intended to
send the box to his friend, yet, as he wrote, in a paper called “
Procrastination and Obedience” (1991), “each morning for over eight months
I woke up and decided that the next morning would be the day to send the
Stiglitz box.” He was always about to send the box, but the moment to act
never arrived. Akerlof, who became one of the central figures in behavioral
economics, came to the realization that procrastination might be more than
just a bad habit. He argued that it revealed something important about the
limits of rational thinking and that it could teach useful lessons about
phenomena as diverse as substance abuse and savings habits. Since his essay
was published, the study of procrastination has become a significant field
in academia, with philosophers, psychologists, and economists all weighing
in.
Academics, who work for long periods in a self-directed fashion, may be
especially prone to putting things off: surveys suggest that the vast
majority of college students procrastinate, and articles in the literature
of procrastination often allude to the author’s own problems with finishing
the piece. (This article will be no exception.) But the academic buzz
around the subject isn’t just a case of eggheads rationalizing their
slothfulness. As various scholars argue in “The Thief of Time,” edited by
Chrisoula Andreou and Mark D. White (Oxford; $65)—a collection of essays on
procrastination, ranging from the resolutely theoretical to the
surprisingly practical—the tendency raises fundamental philosophical and
psychological issues. You may have thought, the last time you blew off work
on a presentation to watch “How I Met Your Mother,” that you were just
slacking. But from another angle you were actually engaging in a practice
that illuminates the fluidity of human identity and the complicated
relationship human beings have to time. Indeed, one essay, by the economist
George Ainslie, a central figure in the study of procrastination, argues
that dragging our heels is “as fundamental as the shape of time and could
well be called the basic impulse.”
Ainslie is probably right that procrastination is a basic human impulse, but
anxiety about it as a serious problem seems to have emerged in the early
modern era. The term itself (derived from a Latin word meaning “to put off
for tomorrow”) entered the English language in the sixteenth century, and,
by the eighteenth, Samuel Johnson was describing it as “one of the general
weaknesses” that “prevail to a greater or less degree in every mind,” and
lamenting the tendency in himself: “I could not forbear to reproach myself
for having so long neglected what was unavoidably to be done, and of which
every moment’s idleness increased the difficulty.” And the problem seems
to be getting worse all the time. According to Piers Steel, a business
professor at the University of Calgary, the percentage of people who
admitted to difficulties with procrastination quadrupled between 1978 and
2002. In that light, it’s possible to see procrastination as the
quintessential modern problem.
It’s also a surprisingly costly one. Each year, Americans waste hundreds of
millions of dollars because they don’t file their taxes on time. The
Harvard economist David Laibson has shown that American workers have forgone
huge amounts of money in matching 401(k) contributions because they never
got around to signing up for a retirement plan. Seventy per cent of patients
suffering from glaucoma risk blindness because they don’t use their
eyedrops regularly. Procrastination also inflicts major costs on businesses
and governments. The recent crisis of the euro was exacerbated by the German
government’s dithering, and the decline of the American auto industry,
exemplified by the bankruptcy of G.M., was due in part to executives’
penchant for delaying tough decisions. (In Alex Taylor’s recent history of
G.M., “Sixty to Zero,” one of the key conclusions is “Procrastination
doesn’t pay.”)
Philosophers are interested in procrastination for another reason. It’s a
powerful example of what the Greeks called akrasia—doing something against
one’s own better judgment. Piers Steel defines procrastination as willingly
deferring something even though you expect the delay to make you worse off.
In other words, if you’re simply saying “Eat, drink, and be merry, for
tomorrow we die,” you’re not really procrastinating. Knowingly delaying
because you think that’s the most efficient use of your time doesn’t count
, either. The essence of procrastination lies in not doing what you think
you should be doing, a mental contortion that surely accounts for the great
psychic toll the habit takes on people. This is the perplexing thing about
procrastination: although it seems to involve avoiding unpleasant tasks,
indulging in it generally doesn’t make people happy. In one study, sixty-
five per cent of students surveyed before they started working on a term
paper said they would like to avoid procrastinating: they knew both that
they wouldn’t do the work on time and that the delay would make them
unhappy.
Most of the contributors to the new book agree that this peculiar
irrationality stems from our relationship to time—in particular, from a
tendency that economists call “hyperbolic discounting.” A two-stage
experiment provides a classic illustration: In the first stage, people are
offered the choice between a hundred dollars today or a hundred and ten
dollars tomorrow; in the second stage, they choose between a hundred dollars
a month from now or a hundred and ten dollars a month and a day from now.
In substance, the two choices are identical: wait an extra day, get an extra
ten bucks. Yet, in the first stage many people choose to take the smaller
sum immediately, whereas in the second they prefer to wait one more day and
get the extra ten bucks. In other words, hyperbolic discounters are able to
make the rational choice when they’re thinking about the future, but, as
the present gets closer, short-term considerations overwhelm their long-term
goals. A similar phenomenon is at work in an experiment run by a group
including the economist George Loewenstein, in which people were asked to
pick one movie to watch that night and one to watch at a later date. Not
surprisingly, for the movie they wanted to watch immediately, people tended
to pick lowbrow comedies and blockbusters, but when asked what movie they
wanted to watch later they were more likely to pick serious, important films
. The problem, of course, is that when the time comes to watch the serious
movie, another frothy one will often seem more appealing. This is why
Netflix queues are filled with movies that never get watched: our
responsible selves put “Hotel Rwanda” and “The Seventh Seal” in our
queue, but when the time comes we end up in front of a rerun of “The
Hangover.”
The lesson of these experiments is not that people are shortsighted or
shallow but that their preferences aren’t consistent over time. We want to
watch the Bergman masterpiece, to give ourselves enough time to write the
report properly, to set aside money for retirement. But our desires shift as
the long run becomes the short run.
Why does this happen? One common answer is ignorance. Socrates believed that
akrasia was, strictly speaking, impossible, since we could not want what is
bad for us; if we act against our own interests, it must be because we don
’t know what’s right. Loewenstein, similarly, is inclined to see the
procrastinator as led astray by the “visceral” rewards of the present. As
the nineteenth-century Scottish economist John Rae put it, “The prospects
of future good, which future years may hold on us, seem at such a moment
dull and dubious, and are apt to be slighted, for objects on which the
daylight is falling strongly, and showing us in all their freshness just
within our grasp.” Loewenstein also suggests that our memory for the
intensity of visceral rewards is deficient: when we put off preparing for
that meeting by telling ourselves that we’ll do it tomorrow, we fail to
take into account that tomorrow the temptation to put off work will be just
as strong.
Ignorance might also affect procrastination through what the social
scientist Jon Elster calls “the planning fallacy.” Elster thinks that
people underestimate the time “it will take them to complete a given task,
partly because they fail to take account of how long it has taken them to
complete similar projects in the past and partly because they rely on smooth
scenarios in which accidents or unforeseen problems never occur.” When I
was writing this piece, for instance, I had to take my car into the shop, I
had to take two unanticipated trips, a family member fell ill, and so on.
Each of these events was, strictly speaking, unexpected, and each took time
away from my work. But they were really just the kinds of problems you
predictably have to deal with in everyday life. Pretending I wouldn’t have
any interruptions to my work was a typical illustration of the planning
fallacy.
Still, ignorance can’t be the whole story. In the first place, we often
procrastinate not by doing fun tasks but by doing jobs whose only allure is
that they aren’t what we should be doing. My apartment, for instance, has
rarely looked tidier than it does at the moment. And people do learn from
experience: procrastinators know all too well the allures of the salient
present, and they want to resist them. They just don’t. A magazine editor I
know, for instance, once had a writer tell her at noon on a Wednesday that
the time-sensitive piece he was working on would be in her in-box by the
time she got back from lunch. She did eventually get the piece—the
following Tuesday. So a fuller explanation of procrastination really needs
to take account of our attitudes to the tasks being avoided. A useful
example can be found in the career of General George McClellan, who led the
Army of the Potomac during the early years of the Civil War and was one of
the greatest procrastinators of all time. When he took charge of the Union
army, McClellan was considered a military genius, but he soon became famous
for his chronic hesitancy. In 1862, despite an excellent opportunity to take
Richmond from Robert E. Lee’s men, with another Union army attacking in a
pincer move, he dillydallied, convinced that he was blocked by hordes of
Confederate soldiers, and missed his chance. Later that year, both before
and after Antietam, he delayed again, squandering a two-to-one advantage
over Lee’s troops. Afterward, Union General-in-Chief Henry Halleck wrote,
“There is an immobility here that exceeds all that any man can conceive of.
It requires the lever of Archimedes to move this inert mass.”
McClellan’s “immobility” highlights several classic reasons we
procrastinate. Although when he took over the Union army he told Lincoln “I
can do it all,” he seems to have been unsure that he could do anything. He
was perpetually imploring Lincoln for new weapons, and, in the words of one
observer, “he felt he never had enough troops, well enough trained or
equipped.” Lack of confidence, sometimes alternating with unrealistic
dreams of heroic success, often leads to procrastination, and many studies
suggest that procrastinators are self-handicappers: rather than risk failure
, they prefer to create conditions that make success impossible, a reflex
that of course creates a vicious cycle. McClellan was also given to
excessive planning, as if only the ideal battle plan were worth acting on.
Procrastinators often succumb to this sort of perfectionism.
Viewed this way, procrastination starts to look less like a question of mere
ignorance than like a complex mixture of weakness, ambition, and inner
conflict. But some of the philosophers in “The Thief of Time” have a more
radical explanation for the gap between what we want to do and what we end
up doing: the person who makes plans and the person who fails to carry them
out are not really the same person: they’re different parts of what the
game theorist Thomas Schelling called “the divided self.” Schelling
proposes that we think of ourselves not as unified selves but as different
beings, jostling, contending, and bargaining for control. Ian McEwan evokes
this state in his recent novel “Solar”: “At moments of important decision
-making, the mind could be considered as a parliament, a debating chamber.
Different factions contended, short- and long-term interests were entrenched
in mutual loathing. Not only were motions tabled and opposed, certain
proposals were aired in order to mask others. Sessions could be devious as
well as stormy.” Similarly, Otto von Bismarck said, “Faust complained
about having two souls in his breast, but I harbor a whole crowd of them and
they quarrel. It is like being in a republic.” In that sense, the first
step to dealing with procrastination isn’t admitting that you have a
problem. It’s admitting that your “you”s have a problem.
If identity is a collection of competing selves, what does each of them
represent? The easy answer is that one represents your short-term interests
(having fun, putting off work, and so on), while another represents your
long-term goals. But, if that’s the case, it’s not obvious how you’d ever
get anything done: the short-term self, it seems, would always win out. The
philosopher Don Ross offers a persuasive solution to the problem. For Ross,
the various parts of the self are all present at once, constantly competing
and bargaining with one another—one that wants to work, one that wants to
watch television, and so on. The key, for Ross, is that although the
television-watching self is interested only in watching TV, it’s interested
in watching TV not just now but also in the future. This means that it can
be bargained with: working now will let you watch more television down the
road. Procrastination, in this reading, is the result of a bargaining
process gone wrong.
The idea of the divided self, though discomfiting to some, can be liberating
in practical terms, because it encourages you to stop thinking about
procrastination as something you can beat by just trying harder. Instead, we
should rely on what Joseph Heath and Joel Anderson, in their essay in “The
Thief of Time,” call “the extended will”—external tools and techniques
to help the parts of our selves that want to work. A classic illustration of
the extended will at work is Ulysses’ decision to have his men bind him to
the mast of his ship. Ulysses knows that when he hears the Sirens he will
be too weak to resist steering the ship onto the rocks in pursuit of them,
so he has his men bind him, thereby forcing him to adhere to his long-term
aims. Similarly, Thomas Schelling once said that he would be willing to pay
extra in advance for a hotel room without a television in it. Today, problem
gamblers write contracts with casinos banning them from the premises. And
people who are trying to lose weight or finish a project will sometimes make
bets with their friends so that if they don’t deliver on their promise it
’ll cost them money. In 2008, a Ph.D. candidate at Chapel Hill wrote
software that enables people to shut off their access to the Internet for up
to eight hours; the program, called Freedom, now has an estimated seventy-
five thousand users.
Not everyone in “The Thief of Time” approves of the reliance on the
extended will. Mark D. White advances an idealist argument rooted in Kantian
ethics: recognizing procrastination as a failure of will, we should seek to
strengthen the will rather than relying on external controls that will
allow it to atrophy further. This isn’t a completely fruitless task: much
recent research suggests that will power is, in some ways, like a muscle and
can be made stronger. The same research, though, also suggests that most of
us have a limited amount of will power and that it’s easily exhausted. In
one famous study, people who had been asked to restrain themselves from
readily available temptation—in this case, a pile of chocolate-chip cookies
that they weren’t allowed to touch—had a harder time persisting in a
difficult task than people who were allowed to eat the cookies.
Given this tendency, it makes sense that we often rely intuitively on
external rules to help ourselves out. A few years ago, Dan Ariely, a
psychologist at M.I.T., did a fascinating experiment examining one of the
most basic external tools for dealing with procrastination: deadlines.
Students in a class were assigned three papers for the semester, and they
were given a choice: they could set separate deadlines for when they had to
hand in each of the papers or they could hand them all in together at the
end of the semester. There was no benefit to handing the papers in early,
since they were all going to be graded at semester’s end, and there was a
potential cost to setting the deadlines, since if you missed a deadline your
grade would be docked. So the rational thing to do was to hand in all the
papers at the end of the semester; that way you’d be free to write the
papers sooner but not at risk of a penalty if you didn’t get around to it.
Yet most of the students chose to set separate deadlines for each paper,
precisely because they knew that they were otherwise unlikely to get around
to working on the papers early, which meant they ran the risk of not
finishing all three by the end of the semester. This is the essence of the
extended will: instead of trusting themselves, the students relied on an
outside tool to make themselves do what they actually wanted to do.
Beyond self-binding, there are other ways to avoid dragging your feet, most
of which depend on what psychologists might call reframing the task in front
of you. Procrastination is driven, in part, by the gap between effort (
which is required now) and reward (which you reap only in the future, if
ever). So narrowing that gap, by whatever means necessary, helps. Since open
-ended tasks with distant deadlines are much easier to postpone than
focussed, short-term projects, dividing projects into smaller, more defined
sections helps. That’s why David Allen, the author of the best-selling time
-management book “Getting Things Done,” lays great emphasis on
classification and definition: the vaguer the task, or the more abstract the
thinking it requires, the less likely you are to finish it. One German
study suggests that just getting people to think about concrete problems (
like how to open a bank account) makes them better at finishing their work—
even when it deals with a completely different subject. Another way of
making procrastination less likely is to reduce the amount of choice we have
nothing. So companies might be better off offering their employees fewer
investment choices in their 401(k) plans, and making signing up for the plan
the default option.
It’s hard to ignore the fact that all these tools are at root about
imposing limits and narrowing options—in other words, about a voluntary
abnegation of freedom. (Victor Hugo would write naked and tell his valet to
hide his clothes so that he’d be unable to go outside when he was supposed
to be writing.) But before we rush to overcome procrastination we should
consider whether it is sometimes an impulse we should heed. The philosopher
Mark Kingwell puts it in existential terms: “Procrastination most often
arises from a sense that there is too much to do, and hence no single aspect
of the to-do worth doing. . . . Underneath this rather antic form of action
-as-inaction is the much more unsettling question whether anything is worth
doing at all.” In that sense, it might be useful to think about two kinds
of procrastination: the kind that is genuinely akratic and the kind that’s
telling you that what you’re supposed to be doing has, deep down, no real
point. The procrastinator’s challenge, and perhaps the philosopher’s, too,
is to figure out which is which.
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2010/10/11/101011crbo_books_surowiecki?printable=true#ixzz1jAitCr2S
这个Surowiecki老是写经济专栏的……
http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2010/10/11/101011cr
Later
What does procrastination tell us about ourselves?
by James Surowiecki October 11, 2010
Procrastination interests philosophers because of its underlying
irrationality.
Some years ago, the economist George Akerlof found himself faced with a
simple task: mailing a box of clothes from India, where he was living, to
the United States. The clothes belonged to his friend and colleague Joseph
Stiglitz, who had left them behind when visiting, so Akerlof was eager to
send the box off. But there was a problem. The combination of Indian
bureaucracy and what Akerlof called “my own ineptitude in such matters”
meant that doing so was going to be a hassle—indeed, he estimated that it
would take an entire workday. So he put off dealing with it, week after week
. This went on for more than eight months, and it was only shortly before
Akerlof himself returned home that he managed to solve his problem: another
friend happened to be sending some things back to the U.S., and Akerlof was
able to add Stiglitz’s clothes to the shipment. Given the vagaries of
intercontinental mail, it’s possible that Akerlof made it back to the
States before Stiglitz’s shirts did.
There’s something comforting about this story: even Nobel-winning
economists procrastinate! Many of us go through life with an array of undone
tasks, large and small, nibbling at our conscience. But Akerlof saw the
experience, for all its familiarity, as mysterious. He genuinely intended to
send the box to his friend, yet, as he wrote, in a paper called “
Procrastination and Obedience” (1991), “each morning for over eight months
I woke up and decided that the next morning would be the day to send the
Stiglitz box.” He was always about to send the box, but the moment to act
never arrived. Akerlof, who became one of the central figures in behavioral
economics, came to the realization that procrastination might be more than
just a bad habit. He argued that it revealed something important about the
limits of rational thinking and that it could teach useful lessons about
phenomena as diverse as substance abuse and savings habits. Since his essay
was published, the study of procrastination has become a significant field
in academia, with philosophers, psychologists, and economists all weighing
in.
Academics, who work for long periods in a self-directed fashion, may be
especially prone to putting things off: surveys suggest that the vast
majority of college students procrastinate, and articles in the literature
of procrastination often allude to the author’s own problems with finishing
the piece. (This article will be no exception.) But the academic buzz
around the subject isn’t just a case of eggheads rationalizing their
slothfulness. As various scholars argue in “The Thief of Time,” edited by
Chrisoula Andreou and Mark D. White (Oxford; $65)—a collection of essays on
procrastination, ranging from the resolutely theoretical to the
surprisingly practical—the tendency raises fundamental philosophical and
psychological issues. You may have thought, the last time you blew off work
on a presentation to watch “How I Met Your Mother,” that you were just
slacking. But from another angle you were actually engaging in a practice
that illuminates the fluidity of human identity and the complicated
relationship human beings have to time. Indeed, one essay, by the economist
George Ainslie, a central figure in the study of procrastination, argues
that dragging our heels is “as fundamental as the shape of time and could
well be called the basic impulse.”
Ainslie is probably right that procrastination is a basic human impulse, but
anxiety about it as a serious problem seems to have emerged in the early
modern era. The term itself (derived from a Latin word meaning “to put off
for tomorrow”) entered the English language in the sixteenth century, and,
by the eighteenth, Samuel Johnson was describing it as “one of the general
weaknesses” that “prevail to a greater or less degree in every mind,” and
lamenting the tendency in himself: “I could not forbear to reproach myself
for having so long neglected what was unavoidably to be done, and of which
every moment’s idleness increased the difficulty.” And the problem seems
to be getting worse all the time. According to Piers Steel, a business
professor at the University of Calgary, the percentage of people who
admitted to difficulties with procrastination quadrupled between 1978 and
2002. In that light, it’s possible to see procrastination as the
quintessential modern problem.
It’s also a surprisingly costly one. Each year, Americans waste hundreds of
millions of dollars because they don’t file their taxes on time. The
Harvard economist David Laibson has shown that American workers have forgone
huge amounts of money in matching 401(k) contributions because they never
got around to signing up for a retirement plan. Seventy per cent of patients
suffering from glaucoma risk blindness because they don’t use their
eyedrops regularly. Procrastination also inflicts major costs on businesses
and governments. The recent crisis of the euro was exacerbated by the German
government’s dithering, and the decline of the American auto industry,
exemplified by the bankruptcy of G.M., was due in part to executives’
penchant for delaying tough decisions. (In Alex Taylor’s recent history of
G.M., “Sixty to Zero,” one of the key conclusions is “Procrastination
doesn’t pay.”)
Philosophers are interested in procrastination for another reason. It’s a
powerful example of what the Greeks called akrasia—doing something against
one’s own better judgment. Piers Steel defines procrastination as willingly
deferring something even though you expect the delay to make you worse off.
In other words, if you’re simply saying “Eat, drink, and be merry, for
tomorrow we die,” you’re not really procrastinating. Knowingly delaying
because you think that’s the most efficient use of your time doesn’t count
, either. The essence of procrastination lies in not doing what you think
you should be doing, a mental contortion that surely accounts for the great
psychic toll the habit takes on people. This is the perplexing thing about
procrastination: although it seems to involve avoiding unpleasant tasks,
indulging in it generally doesn’t make people happy. In one study, sixty-
five per cent of students surveyed before they started working on a term
paper said they would like to avoid procrastinating: they knew both that
they wouldn’t do the work on time and that the delay would make them
unhappy.
Most of the contributors to the new book agree that this peculiar
irrationality stems from our relationship to time—in particular, from a
tendency that economists call “hyperbolic discounting.” A two-stage
experiment provides a classic illustration: In the first stage, people are
offered the choice between a hundred dollars today or a hundred and ten
dollars tomorrow; in the second stage, they choose between a hundred dollars
a month from now or a hundred and ten dollars a month and a day from now.
In substance, the two choices are identical: wait an extra day, get an extra
ten bucks. Yet, in the first stage many people choose to take the smaller
sum immediately, whereas in the second they prefer to wait one more day and
get the extra ten bucks. In other words, hyperbolic discounters are able to
make the rational choice when they’re thinking about the future, but, as
the present gets closer, short-term considerations overwhelm their long-term
goals. A similar phenomenon is at work in an experiment run by a group
including the economist George Loewenstein, in which people were asked to
pick one movie to watch that night and one to watch at a later date. Not
surprisingly, for the movie they wanted to watch immediately, people tended
to pick lowbrow comedies and blockbusters, but when asked what movie they
wanted to watch later they were more likely to pick serious, important films
. The problem, of course, is that when the time comes to watch the serious
movie, another frothy one will often seem more appealing. This is why
Netflix queues are filled with movies that never get watched: our
responsible selves put “Hotel Rwanda” and “The Seventh Seal” in our
queue, but when the time comes we end up in front of a rerun of “The
Hangover.”
The lesson of these experiments is not that people are shortsighted or
shallow but that their preferences aren’t consistent over time. We want to
watch the Bergman masterpiece, to give ourselves enough time to write the
report properly, to set aside money for retirement. But our desires shift as
the long run becomes the short run.
Why does this happen? One common answer is ignorance. Socrates believed that
akrasia was, strictly speaking, impossible, since we could not want what is
bad for us; if we act against our own interests, it must be because we don
’t know what’s right. Loewenstein, similarly, is inclined to see the
procrastinator as led astray by the “visceral” rewards of the present. As
the nineteenth-century Scottish economist John Rae put it, “The prospects
of future good, which future years may hold on us, seem at such a moment
dull and dubious, and are apt to be slighted, for objects on which the
daylight is falling strongly, and showing us in all their freshness just
within our grasp.” Loewenstein also suggests that our memory for the
intensity of visceral rewards is deficient: when we put off preparing for
that meeting by telling ourselves that we’ll do it tomorrow, we fail to
take into account that tomorrow the temptation to put off work will be just
as strong.
Ignorance might also affect procrastination through what the social
scientist Jon Elster calls “the planning fallacy.” Elster thinks that
people underestimate the time “it will take them to complete a given task,
partly because they fail to take account of how long it has taken them to
complete similar projects in the past and partly because they rely on smooth
scenarios in which accidents or unforeseen problems never occur.” When I
was writing this piece, for instance, I had to take my car into the shop, I
had to take two unanticipated trips, a family member fell ill, and so on.
Each of these events was, strictly speaking, unexpected, and each took time
away from my work. But they were really just the kinds of problems you
predictably have to deal with in everyday life. Pretending I wouldn’t have
any interruptions to my work was a typical illustration of the planning
fallacy.
Still, ignorance can’t be the whole story. In the first place, we often
procrastinate not by doing fun tasks but by doing jobs whose only allure is
that they aren’t what we should be doing. My apartment, for instance, has
rarely looked tidier than it does at the moment. And people do learn from
experience: procrastinators know all too well the allures of the salient
present, and they want to resist them. They just don’t. A magazine editor I
know, for instance, once had a writer tell her at noon on a Wednesday that
the time-sensitive piece he was working on would be in her in-box by the
time she got back from lunch. She did eventually get the piece—the
following Tuesday. So a fuller explanation of procrastination really needs
to take account of our attitudes to the tasks being avoided. A useful
example can be found in the career of General George McClellan, who led the
Army of the Potomac during the early years of the Civil War and was one of
the greatest procrastinators of all time. When he took charge of the Union
army, McClellan was considered a military genius, but he soon became famous
for his chronic hesitancy. In 1862, despite an excellent opportunity to take
Richmond from Robert E. Lee’s men, with another Union army attacking in a
pincer move, he dillydallied, convinced that he was blocked by hordes of
Confederate soldiers, and missed his chance. Later that year, both before
and after Antietam, he delayed again, squandering a two-to-one advantage
over Lee’s troops. Afterward, Union General-in-Chief Henry Halleck wrote,
“There is an immobility here that exceeds all that any man can conceive of.
It requires the lever of Archimedes to move this inert mass.”
McClellan’s “immobility” highlights several classic reasons we
procrastinate. Although when he took over the Union army he told Lincoln “I
can do it all,” he seems to have been unsure that he could do anything. He
was perpetually imploring Lincoln for new weapons, and, in the words of one
observer, “he felt he never had enough troops, well enough trained or
equipped.” Lack of confidence, sometimes alternating with unrealistic
dreams of heroic success, often leads to procrastination, and many studies
suggest that procrastinators are self-handicappers: rather than risk failure
, they prefer to create conditions that make success impossible, a reflex
that of course creates a vicious cycle. McClellan was also given to
excessive planning, as if only the ideal battle plan were worth acting on.
Procrastinators often succumb to this sort of perfectionism.
Viewed this way, procrastination starts to look less like a question of mere
ignorance than like a complex mixture of weakness, ambition, and inner
conflict. But some of the philosophers in “The Thief of Time” have a more
radical explanation for the gap between what we want to do and what we end
up doing: the person who makes plans and the person who fails to carry them
out are not really the same person: they’re different parts of what the
game theorist Thomas Schelling called “the divided self.” Schelling
proposes that we think of ourselves not as unified selves but as different
beings, jostling, contending, and bargaining for control. Ian McEwan evokes
this state in his recent novel “Solar”: “At moments of important decision
-making, the mind could be considered as a parliament, a debating chamber.
Different factions contended, short- and long-term interests were entrenched
in mutual loathing. Not only were motions tabled and opposed, certain
proposals were aired in order to mask others. Sessions could be devious as
well as stormy.” Similarly, Otto von Bismarck said, “Faust complained
about having two souls in his breast, but I harbor a whole crowd of them and
they quarrel. It is like being in a republic.” In that sense, the first
step to dealing with procrastination isn’t admitting that you have a
problem. It’s admitting that your “you”s have a problem.
If identity is a collection of competing selves, what does each of them
represent? The easy answer is that one represents your short-term interests
(having fun, putting off work, and so on), while another represents your
long-term goals. But, if that’s the case, it’s not obvious how you’d ever
get anything done: the short-term self, it seems, would always win out. The
philosopher Don Ross offers a persuasive solution to the problem. For Ross,
the various parts of the self are all present at once, constantly competing
and bargaining with one another—one that wants to work, one that wants to
watch television, and so on. The key, for Ross, is that although the
television-watching self is interested only in watching TV, it’s interested
in watching TV not just now but also in the future. This means that it can
be bargained with: working now will let you watch more television down the
road. Procrastination, in this reading, is the result of a bargaining
process gone wrong.
The idea of the divided self, though discomfiting to some, can be liberating
in practical terms, because it encourages you to stop thinking about
procrastination as something you can beat by just trying harder. Instead, we
should rely on what Joseph Heath and Joel Anderson, in their essay in “The
Thief of Time,” call “the extended will”—external tools and techniques
to help the parts of our selves that want to work. A classic illustration of
the extended will at work is Ulysses’ decision to have his men bind him to
the mast of his ship. Ulysses knows that when he hears the Sirens he will
be too weak to resist steering the ship onto the rocks in pursuit of them,
so he has his men bind him, thereby forcing him to adhere to his long-term
aims. Similarly, Thomas Schelling once said that he would be willing to pay
extra in advance for a hotel room without a television in it. Today, problem
gamblers write contracts with casinos banning them from the premises. And
people who are trying to lose weight or finish a project will sometimes make
bets with their friends so that if they don’t deliver on their promise it
’ll cost them money. In 2008, a Ph.D. candidate at Chapel Hill wrote
software that enables people to shut off their access to the Internet for up
to eight hours; the program, called Freedom, now has an estimated seventy-
five thousand users.
Not everyone in “The Thief of Time” approves of the reliance on the
extended will. Mark D. White advances an idealist argument rooted in Kantian
ethics: recognizing procrastination as a failure of will, we should seek to
strengthen the will rather than relying on external controls that will
allow it to atrophy further. This isn’t a completely fruitless task: much
recent research suggests that will power is, in some ways, like a muscle and
can be made stronger. The same research, though, also suggests that most of
us have a limited amount of will power and that it’s easily exhausted. In
one famous study, people who had been asked to restrain themselves from
readily available temptation—in this case, a pile of chocolate-chip cookies
that they weren’t allowed to touch—had a harder time persisting in a
difficult task than people who were allowed to eat the cookies.
Given this tendency, it makes sense that we often rely intuitively on
external rules to help ourselves out. A few years ago, Dan Ariely, a
psychologist at M.I.T., did a fascinating experiment examining one of the
most basic external tools for dealing with procrastination: deadlines.
Students in a class were assigned three papers for the semester, and they
were given a choice: they could set separate deadlines for when they had to
hand in each of the papers or they could hand them all in together at the
end of the semester. There was no benefit to handing the papers in early,
since they were all going to be graded at semester’s end, and there was a
potential cost to setting the deadlines, since if you missed a deadline your
grade would be docked. So the rational thing to do was to hand in all the
papers at the end of the semester; that way you’d be free to write the
papers sooner but not at risk of a penalty if you didn’t get around to it.
Yet most of the students chose to set separate deadlines for each paper,
precisely because they knew that they were otherwise unlikely to get around
to working on the papers early, which meant they ran the risk of not
finishing all three by the end of the semester. This is the essence of the
extended will: instead of trusting themselves, the students relied on an
outside tool to make themselves do what they actually wanted to do.
Beyond self-binding, there are other ways to avoid dragging your feet, most
of which depend on what psychologists might call reframing the task in front
of you. Procrastination is driven, in part, by the gap between effort (
which is required now) and reward (which you reap only in the future, if
ever). So narrowing that gap, by whatever means necessary, helps. Since open
-ended tasks with distant deadlines are much easier to postpone than
focussed, short-term projects, dividing projects into smaller, more defined
sections helps. That’s why David Allen, the author of the best-selling time
-management book “Getting Things Done,” lays great emphasis on
classification and definition: the vaguer the task, or the more abstract the
thinking it requires, the less likely you are to finish it. One German
study suggests that just getting people to think about concrete problems (
like how to open a bank account) makes them better at finishing their work—
even when it deals with a completely different subject. Another way of
making procrastination less likely is to reduce the amount of choice we have
nothing. So companies might be better off offering their employees fewer
investment choices in their 401(k) plans, and making signing up for the plan
the default option.
It’s hard to ignore the fact that all these tools are at root about
imposing limits and narrowing options—in other words, about a voluntary
abnegation of freedom. (Victor Hugo would write naked and tell his valet to
hide his clothes so that he’d be unable to go outside when he was supposed
to be writing.) But before we rush to overcome procrastination we should
consider whether it is sometimes an impulse we should heed. The philosopher
Mark Kingwell puts it in existential terms: “Procrastination most often
arises from a sense that there is too much to do, and hence no single aspect
of the to-do worth doing. . . . Underneath this rather antic form of action
-as-inaction is the much more unsettling question whether anything is worth
doing at all.” In that sense, it might be useful to think about two kinds
of procrastination: the kind that is genuinely akratic and the kind that’s
telling you that what you’re supposed to be doing has, deep down, no real
point. The procrastinator’s challenge, and perhaps the philosopher’s, too,
is to figure out which is which.
Read more http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2010/10/11/101011crbo_books_surowiecki?printable=true#ixzz1jAitCr2S
wh
109 楼
其实说的就是人的非理性一面是不。现代人压力大，非理性越来越突出……哈哈。这人
搞经济社会学吗？经济学经常有人做社会学survey分析，topic都很有趣，即使不信也
可以看着玩。有一个研究说高个子经常社会地位高、钱多，看得我很激动，哈哈。
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 居然找到了：
: 这个Surowiecki老是写经济专栏的……
: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2010/10/11/101011cr
: Later
: What does procrastination tell us about ourselves?
: by James Surowiecki October 11, 2010
: Procrastination interests philosophers because of its underlying
: irrationality.
: Some years ago, the economist George Akerlof found himself faced with a
: simple task: mailing a box of clothes from India, where he was living, to
搞经济社会学吗？经济学经常有人做社会学survey分析，topic都很有趣，即使不信也
可以看着玩。有一个研究说高个子经常社会地位高、钱多，看得我很激动，哈哈。
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 居然找到了：
: 这个Surowiecki老是写经济专栏的……
: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2010/10/11/101011cr
: Later
: What does procrastination tell us about ourselves?
: by James Surowiecki October 11, 2010
: Procrastination interests philosophers because of its underlying
: irrationality.
: Some years ago, the economist George Akerlof found himself faced with a
: simple task: mailing a box of clothes from India, where he was living, to
b*s
110 楼
“高个子经常社会地位高、钱多”
嗯，拿破仑，邓小平，还有我们纽约市长，都给你佐证……
to
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 其实说的就是人的非理性一面是不。现代人压力大，非理性越来越突出……哈哈。这人
: 搞经济社会学吗？经济学经常有人做社会学survey分析，topic都很有趣，即使不信也
: 可以看着玩。有一个研究说高个子经常社会地位高、钱多，看得我很激动，哈哈。
嗯，拿破仑，邓小平，还有我们纽约市长，都给你佐证……
to
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 其实说的就是人的非理性一面是不。现代人压力大，非理性越来越突出……哈哈。这人
: 搞经济社会学吗？经济学经常有人做社会学survey分析，topic都很有趣，即使不信也
: 可以看着玩。有一个研究说高个子经常社会地位高、钱多，看得我很激动，哈哈。
S*e
111 楼
Happy B day!
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
z*r
112 楼
生日快乐
s*s
113 楼
webMD上有一些文章，我以前在那边看的
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 去年的New Yorker上有一篇长文就是这个话题的，有木有人也读过？
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 去年的New Yorker上有一篇长文就是这个话题的，有木有人也读过？
s*s
114 楼
http://www.webmd.com/balance/guide/its-never-too-late-to-stop-p
It's Never Too Late to Stop Procrastinating
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 无药可治？
: 换个角度，也可以是无药自愈的：）
It's Never Too Late to Stop Procrastinating
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 无药可治？
: 换个角度，也可以是无药自愈的：）
S*t
115 楼
嗯，生日快乐！
跟我对家的时候才会无敌手，LOL
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
跟我对家的时候才会无敌手，LOL
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
b*e
116 楼
看看你是不是能赶上末班车:)
【在 S*******t 的大作中提到】
: 嗯，生日快乐！
: 跟我对家的时候才会无敌手，LOL
【在 S*******t 的大作中提到】
: 嗯，生日快乐！
: 跟我对家的时候才会无敌手，LOL
s*a
117 楼
为啥这么多美女给你贺生？忌妒！快传授一下绝招，是打牌还是拍照认识的？
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 看看你是不是能赶上末班车:)
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 看看你是不是能赶上末班车:)
b*e
118 楼
都是我的歌迷。。
【在 s**a 的大作中提到】
: 为啥这么多美女给你贺生？忌妒！快传授一下绝招，是打牌还是拍照认识的？
【在 s**a 的大作中提到】
: 为啥这么多美女给你贺生？忌妒！快传授一下绝招，是打牌还是拍照认识的？
s*a
119 楼
锅呢？
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 都是我的歌迷。。
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 都是我的歌迷。。
wh
120 楼
你这是个例，人家做的是普遍性调查……哈哈。bos你高不高呀？哈哈哈。
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: “高个子经常社会地位高、钱多”
: 嗯，拿破仑，邓小平，还有我们纽约市长，都给你佐证……
:
: to
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: “高个子经常社会地位高、钱多”
: 嗯，拿破仑，邓小平，还有我们纽约市长，都给你佐证……
:
: to
wh
121 楼
你还唱歌啊？没听过呀，哈哈哈。
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 都是我的歌迷。。
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 都是我的歌迷。。
b*s
122 楼
不高不低，所谓“增之一分则太长，减之一分则太短”……
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 你这是个例，人家做的是普遍性调查……哈哈。bos你高不高呀？哈哈哈。
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 你这是个例，人家做的是普遍性调查……哈哈。bos你高不高呀？哈哈哈。
wh
123 楼
哈哈哈，美哉，bos！
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 不高不低，所谓“增之一分则太长，减之一分则太短”……
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 不高不低，所谓“增之一分则太长，减之一分则太短”……
b*e
124 楼
呵呵 唱过后估计你就没欲望再和我打电话了。。
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 你还唱歌啊？没听过呀，哈哈哈。
【在 wh 的大作中提到】
: 你还唱歌啊？没听过呀，哈哈哈。
b*e
125 楼
看来是黄金比例
168,36D
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 不高不低，所谓“增之一分则太长，减之一分则太短”……
168,36D
【在 b*s 的大作中提到】
: 不高不低，所谓“增之一分则太长，减之一分则太短”……
b*s
126 楼
你说得比唱得还好听！
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 呵呵 唱过后估计你就没欲望再和我打电话了。。
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 呵呵 唱过后估计你就没欲望再和我打电话了。。
b*s
127 楼
168太矮，36D好像不太合适，毕竟我不into drag的……
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 看来是黄金比例
: 168,36D
【在 b***e 的大作中提到】
: 看来是黄金比例
: 168,36D
a*7
128 楼
来晚了，brave生日零5天快乐！
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
【在 l******k 的大作中提到】
: 生日快乐
: 家庭幸福
: 工作顺利
: 美片多多
: 打牌打扁天下无敌手，呵呵
: 以前喜欢听fireflies
: 送你一起分享：）
wh
129 楼
这阵又忙啊？快过年了哎。好好休息好好玩！
【在 a*********7 的大作中提到】
: 来晚了，brave生日零5天快乐！
【在 a*********7 的大作中提到】
: 来晚了，brave生日零5天快乐！
相关阅读
ZT: 借贵宝地作个广告: 中国对联网 “青锋单联”征对擂台赛 (转载)Imelda May产品经理你伤不起luckyjim 封 goldy 在 LeisureTime 版 (转载)音乐圈和影视圈的魔咒问一句唐诗的翻译奇迹 (转载)My little country棺材老师，白字先生ztthe man who sold the world Re: 【车水马龙】五言《愁思赋》我喜爱的非主流新歌( 夏 2011 )我眼中的中国摇滚十人zz鹅进来看，你要找的帖子我找到了，哈哈！哪里可以知道经典电影的回放呢？说说最近看到的几个文萃疑问小女孩的那个案子如果当时这么办向月葵Leonard Cohen借花献佛送给Swann童鞋，就当是赔礼了吧~goldy帮我也看看呗