保持自主权
内容总结：
【个人成长与成功的关键：保持主观能动性】
近日，知名投资人Naval Ravikant与合作者Nivi围绕“保持主观能动性”的讨论引发广泛共鸣。双方以社交媒体推文为切入点，指出许多人习惯于将困境归咎于外部因素，却忽视了个人能动性的核心作用。
Naval强调，尽管现实世界存在不平等与客观障碍，但长期来看，主动承担责任、坚持迭代行动并能持续思考的个体，往往能显著改变自身处境。他以硅谷成功者为例，指出那些二十年前展现才华并坚持长期奋斗的人，几乎无一例外取得了成就——因为他们主动选择进入高能动性环境，并持续践行“对自己负责”的原则。
讨论进一步指出，悲观主义容易成为“自我实现的预言”：若只关注阻碍而放弃行动，则无异于主动走向失败。相反，像埃隆·马斯克、史蒂夫·乔布斯等愿景驱动者，正是通过长期坚持高目标，将具体知识转化为通用能力，最终突破局限。
核心观点在于：人天生拥有能动性，但需主动维护“我能改变事物”的信念。拒绝 cynicism（愤世嫉俗），承担责任，才是突破困境、实现长期成长的关键路径。
中文翻译：
守护你的主观能动性
尼维：我们再聊一条让我一见倾心的推文——可能我还转发了。当时我觉得，人们之所以转发某条内容，是因为看到了自己心有所感却未能言表的观点，那些深藏于心却未被明确表达的思绪。
正是这种时刻让人惊呼"我必须转发这个！"。今年1月17日就有这样一条："凡事归咎于己，方能守护能动之力"。在我看来，其核心在于：承担所有责任的过程，正是你创造并保持解决问题能力的过程。
若你认为问题与己无关，自然无从着手解决。
纳瓦尔：关于你提到"心有戚戚然却表达不如人"这点，爱默生堪称个中圣手。他总能以精妙句式道出你的心声，让人不禁感叹"这正是我所思所感，却苦于无法具象表达"。
他曾留下这样的箴言："在每部天才之作中，我们都能瞥见自己曾经摒弃的思想——它们带着某种疏离的威严重返心灵。"我对此言推崇备至。这也是我在推特尝试的方向：用新颖方式阐述真理。
不仅要真实有趣地表达，更需蕴含真挚的情感力量。必须是我近期深有感触的重要感悟，否则便成了无病呻吟。我从不会刻意构思推文，往往是经历某些触动心弦的事件后，将其凝练成思想。
我会反复验证："这是真理吗？"当确认真实性（至少在我关注的语境中成立），并以便于记忆的方式呈现时，才会发布。对于心有灵犀的读者而言，这从来都不是新鲜观点。
平庸的表达会沦为陈词滥调，但新颖的表述能唤醒重要记忆，或将特定认知转化为更普适的智慧。这个过程于我有益，望亦能惠及他人。
说到这条推文，我注意到世人惯于愤世嫉俗。常闻"财富皆来自掠夺"之论，指责银行家、权贵资本家、窃国者或寡头之流。诸如"寒门难出贵子"、"特定种族难跃龙门"、"身有残疾者永无出头之日"等论调不绝于耳。
问题在于：虽然现实确存障碍，世间从无绝对公平——公平不过是童真幻想，难以在现实中定格。但命运并非全凭运气主宰。你我生命中都曾通过实际行动创造过美好成果，心知若非当时所为，断无今日之果。
你完全能够推动命运指针，这绝非运气使然。特别是当时间跨度延长、行动强度增加、迭代次数累积、思考与抉择深化时，运气的权重自会递减。简言之：二十年硅谷所见之才俊，无不安身立命。
无一例外。本应按才智指数为他们建立追踪档案——顺带一提，YC创业孵化器正是大规模实践此法。这个机制如此卓越，因为它确实有效。坚持二十年，必见成效。或许有人会说"硅谷精英站着说话不腰疼"。
但无人天生属于硅谷。他们皆因向往智识高地、追求主观能动而汇聚于此。能动性确实奏效，但若急功近利，注定失望而归。
过早放弃者需要更高阶的动力源。这正是马斯克远征火星、萨姆创制AGI（人工通用智能）、乔布斯半世纪前执着于"打造书本大小的计算机"（即iPad雏形）的深层动因。唯有此等长远愿景，方能支撑数十载持之以恒的构建历程。
愤世嫉俗终将自我应验，悲观主义犹如驾驶摩托车却紧盯砖墙——你会不自觉地撞向障碍。故而必须守护与生俱来的能动之力。孩童天生拥有这种能力：心之所向，身必往之。你必须始终保持改变现实的信念，永存这份能动之心。
英文来源：
Preserve Your Agency
Nivi: Let’s talk about one more tweet which I liked when I first saw it, or I might have retweeted it. I think people retweet things when they see something that they haven’t figured out how to say yet, but they knew in their head, but it’s just implicit—it hadn’t been made explicit.
I think that’s when people are like, “I need to retweet this.” So this one was January 17: “Blame yourself for everything and preserve your agency.”
From my end it’s like: Take responsibility for everything, and in the process of taking responsibility for something, you create and preserve the agency to go solve that problem.
If you’re not responsible for the problem, there’s no way for you to fix the problem.
Naval: Just to address your point of how it was something you already knew, but phrased in a way that you liked. Emerson did this all the time. He would phrase things in a beautiful way and you would say, “Oh, that’s exactly what I was thinking and feeling, but I didn’t know how to articulate it.”
And the way he put it was he said, “In every work of genius, we recognize our own rejected thoughts; they come back to us with a certain alienated majesty.” And I just love that line. It’s what I try to do with Twitter, which is I try to say something true, but in an interesting way.
And not only is this a true and interesting way to say it, but also it has to be something that really has emotional heft behind it. It has to have struck me recently and been important to me. Otherwise, I’m just faking it. I don’t sit around trying to think up tweets to write. It’s more that something happens to me, something affects me emotionally, and then I synthesize it in a certain way.
I test it. I’m like, “Is this true?” And if I feel like it’s true, or mostly true or true in the context that I care about, and if I can say it in some way that’ll help me stick in my mind, then I just send it out there. And it’s nothing new for the people who get it.
If it’s not said in an interesting way, then it’s a cliche, or if they’ve heard it too much, it’s a cliche. But if it’s said in an interesting way, then it may remind them of something that was important, or it might convert their specific knowledge, or might be a hook for converting their specific knowledge into more general knowledge in their own minds.
So I find that process useful for myself and hopefully others do too. Now, for the specific tweet, I just noticed this tendency where people are very cynical and they’ll say, “All the wealth is stolen,” for example, by banksters and the like, or crony capitalists or what have you, or just outright thieves or oligarchs.
“You can’t rise up in this world if you’re X.” “You can’t rise up in this world if you’re a poor kid.” “You can’t rise up in this world if you are from this race or ethnicity, if you were born in that country, or if you are lame or crippled or blind,” or what have you.
The problem with this is that yes, there are real hindrances in the world. It is not a level playing field, and fair is something that only exists in a child’s imagination and cannot be pinned down in any real way. But the world is not entirely luck. In fact, you know that because in your own life there are things that you have done that have led to good outcomes and you know that if you had not done that thing, it would not have led to that good outcome.
So you can absolutely move the needle, and it’s not all luck. And especially the longer the timeframe you’re talking about, the more intense the activity, the more iteration you take and the more thinking and choice you apply into it, the less luck matters. It recedes into the distance. To give you a simple example, which most people won’t love because they’re not in Silicon Valley, but every brilliant person I met in Silicon Valley 20 years ago, every single one, the young brilliant ones, every single one is successful.
Every single one. I cannot think of an exception. I should have gone back and just indexed them all based on their brilliance. By the way, that’s what Y Combinator does at scale, right? What a great mechanism. So it works. If people stick at it for 20 years, it works. Now you might say, “Easy for you to say, man, that’s for the people in Silicon Valley.”
No one was born here. They all moved here. They moved here because they wanted to be where the other smart kids were and because they wanted to be high agency. So agency does work, but if you’re keeping track of the time period, you’re going to be disappointed.
You’ll give up too soon. So you need a higher motivator. That’s why Elon goes to Mars, and that’s why Sam wants to invent AGI. And that’s why Steve Jobs wanted to build, 50 years ago, in the eighties he was talking about building a computer that would fit in a book.
He was talking about the iPad. So it’s these very long visions that sustain you over the long periods of time to actually build the thing you want to build and get to where you want to get. So a cynical belief is self-fulfilling. A pessimistic belief is like you’re driving the motorcycle, but you’re looking at the brick wall that you’re supposed to turn away from.
You will turn into the brick wall without even realizing it. So you have to preserve your agency. You’re born with agency. Children are high-agency. They go get what they want. If they want something, they see it, they go get it. You have to preserve your agency. You have to preserve your belief that you can change things.