A SURE WAY OF MAKING ENEMIES---AND HOW TO AVOID IT

一定会树敌的方式---以及如何避免它

 

When Theodore Roosevelt was in the White House, he confessed that if he could be right 75 percent of the time, he would reach the highest measure of his expectation.

当西奥多·罗斯福还在白宫时，他承认，如果他当时能有75%正确率的话，那他已达到了他期望值的最高标准。

   If that was the highest rating that one of the most distinguished men of the twentieth century could hope to obtain, what about you and me?

    如果那是二十世纪最杰出的人物之一所希望获得的最高评价的话，那么你和我呢？

   If you can be sure of being right only 55 percent of the time, you can go down to Wall Street and make a million dollars a day. If you can’t be sure of being right even 55 percent of the time, why should you tell other people they are wrong?

    如果你能肯定当时只有55%的正确率的话，那么你就可以去闯荡华尔街，并一天赚它一百万美元。如果你不能保证当时甚至是55%的正确率的话，那么你凭什么告诉别人他们错了呢？

   You can tell people they are wrong by a look or an intonation or a gesture just as eloquently as you can in words---and if you tell them they are wrong, do you make them want to agree with you? Never! For you have struck a direct blow at their intelligence, judgment, pride and self-respect. That will make them want to strike back. But it will never make them want to change their minds. You may then hurl at them all the logic of a Plato or an Immanuel Kant, but you will not alter their opinions, for you have hurt their feelings.

    你可以通过一个眼神，一种语调或一个手势告诉人们他们错了，就像你可以用语言一样雄辩---如果你告诉他们，他们错了，你能让他们同意你的观点吗？决不可能！因为你直接打击了他们的才智、判断力、骄傲和自尊。那样会使他们想要反击。但那样从不会使他们想要改变他们的想法。然后你可以用柏拉图和康德的所有逻辑来与他们理论，但你不会改变他们的观点，因为你伤害了他们的感情。

   Never begin by announcing “I am going to prove so-and-so to you.” That’s bad. That’s tantamount to saying: “I’ am smarter than you are. I’m going to tell you a thing or two and make you change your mind.”

    永远不要一开始就宣布“我要向你证明某人某事”。那样不好。这就等同于说：“我比你聪明。我要告诉一两件事，并使你改变主意”。

   That is a challenge. It arouses opposition and makes the listener want to battle with you before you even start.

    那是一种挑战。它会激起对抗，甚至在你开始说话之前使听者就想要与你对抗。

   It is difficult, under even the most benign conditions, to change people’s minds. So why make it harder? Why handicap yourself?

    即使在最理想的条件下，想要改变人们的想法都是困难的。那么为什么要使事态变得更难呢？为什么要为难自己呢？

   If you are going to prove anything, don’t let anybody know it. Do it so subtly, so adroitly, that no one will feel that you are doing it. This was expressed succinctly by Alexander Pope:

    如果你想证明什么，别让人知道。做得要巧妙、机敏，让人不会感觉你正在做它。亚历山大·蒲柏简洁地表达了这点：

     Men must be taught as if you taught them not

     And things unknown proposed as things forgot

     人们一定是受到了你的教育，却好像你并没有教育他们似的

     而指出他人未知的事物，就像是他的一时疏忽。

   Over three hundred years ago Galileo said:

   三百多年前加利略说过：

     You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him to find it within himself.

 你无法教给一个人任何东西；你只能帮助他在其内心深处发现它。

   As Lord Chesterfield said to his son:

   正像切斯特菲尔德勋爵对他儿子说的那样：

     Be wiser than other people if you can; but do not tell them so.

     如果你可以的话，要比其他人聪明；但要不露声色。

   Socrates said repeatedly to his followers in Athens:

   苏格拉底在雅典再三地告诉其追随者们：

     One thing only I know, and that is that I know nothing.

     我知道的唯一一件事情，那就是我一无所知。

   Well, I can’t hope to be any smarter than Socrates, so I have quit telling people they are wrong. And I find that it pays.

   好了，我并不指望比苏格拉底更聪明，因此我不再告诉人们，他们错了。我发现这是值得的。

   If a person makes a statement that you think is wrong---yes, even that you know is wrong—isn’t it better to begin by saying: “Well, now, look. I thought otherwise, but I may be wrong. I frequently am. And if I am wrong, I want to be put right. Let’s examine the facts.”

    如果一个人表达了一种观点，你认为是错的---是的，甚至你知道是错的---这样开始表述不是更好吗：“好吧，现在，你看，我起初以为是这样，但我可能错了。我经常出错。如果我错了，我想改正过来。让我们来查一下事实”。

   There’s magic, positive magic, in such phrases as: “I may be wrong. I frequently am. Let’s examine the facts.”

    有一种魔力，积极的魔力，就在这样的措词中：“我可能错了。我经常出错。如果我错了，我想改正过来。让我们来查一下事实”。

   Nobody in the heavens above or on the earth beneath or in the waters under the earth will ever object to your saying: “I may be wrong. Let’s examine the facts.”

    在天上，在大地之下，或者在地下的水中没人再会反对你说：“我可能错了。让我们核对一下事实”。

   One of our class members who used this approach in dealing with customers was Harold Reinke, a Dodge dealer in Billings, Montana. He reported that because of the pressures of the automobile business, he was often hard-boiled and callous when dealing with customers’ complaints. This caused flared tempers, loss of business and general unpleasantness.

    蒙大拿比林斯的道奇经销商哈罗德·赖因克是我们班上的一位学员，他曾使用过这种与顾客打交道的方法。他报告说，由于汽车销售业的压力，当他处理顾客投诉时常常冷酷无情。这引发了顾客的不满，生意受损，而且大家都不愉快。

   He told his class: “Recognizing that this was getting me nowhere fast, I tried a new tack. I would say something like this: ‘Our dealership has made so many mistakes that I am frequently ashamed. We may have erred in your case. Tell me about it.’

    他告诉学生们：“意识到这样做会让我毫无进展，我试了一种新策略。我会这样说：‘我们的特许经销商出了这么多差错，因此我常常感到羞愧。我们可能弄错了你的情况。告诉我有关的情况吧’。

   “This approach becomes quite disarming, and by the time the customer releases his feelings, he is usually much more reasonable when it comes to settling the matter. In fact, several customers have thanked me for having such an understanding attitude. And two of them have even brought in friends to buy new cars. In this highly competitive market, we need more of this type of customer, and I believe that showing respect for all customers’ opinions and treating them diplomatically and courteously will help beat the competition.”

“这种方法让人很放松，而在顾客发泄了情绪，解决问题时他通常会通情达理得多。实际上，一些顾客对于这样一种理解的态度向我表示了感谢。而且他们中的两位甚至还带了朋友来买新车。在这种竞争激烈的市场中，我们需要更多的这类顾客，而且我相信，尊重所有顾客的意见，婉转并礼貌地对待他们将有助于击败竞争对手”。

   You will never get into trouble by admitting that you may be wrong. That will stop all argument and inspire your opponent to be just as fair and open and broad-minded as you are. It will make him want to admit that he, too, may be wrong.

通过承认你可能错了，你永远都不会陷入麻烦之中。那样会停止所有的争论，并激励你的反对者像你一样公平、公开和心胸开阔。这会使他承认他可能也错了。

   If you know positively that a person is wrong, and you bluntly tell him or her so, what happens? Let me illustrate. Mr. S------, a young New York attorney, once argued a rather important case before the United States Supreme Court (Lustgarten v. Fleet Corporation 280 U. S. 320). The case involved a considerable sum of money and an important question of law. During the argument, one of the Supreme Court justices said to him: “The statute of limitations in admiralty law is six years, is it not?”

    如果你确实知道一个人错了，而你又直白地告诉他或她，会发生什么呢？让我来举例说明一下。S------先生，一位年轻的纽约律师，曾在美国最高法院（卢斯特加滕诉美国航运局商船舰队公司）为一个相当重要的案件辩护。该案涉及到一大笔钱和一个重要的法律问题。辩论期间，最高法院的一位法官对他说：“海事法中的诉讼时效是6年，不是吗？”

   Mr. S------- stopped, stared at the justice for a moment, and then said bluntly: “Your Honor, there is no statute of limitations in admiralty.”

    S-----先生停顿下来，凝视了法官片刻，然后直白地说：“法官大人，海事法中并没有诉讼时效”。

   “A hush fell on the court,” said Mr. S------- as he related his experience to one of the author’s classes, “and the temperature in the room seemed to drop to zero. I was right. Justice ------- was wrong. And I had told him so. But did that make him friendly? No. I still believe that I had the law on my side. And I know that I spoke better than I ever spoke before. But I didn’t persuade. I made the enormous blunder of telling a very learned and famous man that he was wrong.”

    “法庭上一片寂静”，S-----先生说，就像他针对作者的一堂课讲述他的经历一样，“房间的温度似乎降到了零度。我是对的。法官-----错了。我就这样告诉了他。但这使他变得友好了吗？没有。我依然相信法律站在我这边。而且我知道，我表述的比我曾经表述都要更好。但我并没有说服他。我犯了大错，告诉一位极为博学而著名的人，他错了。”

   Few people are logical. Most of us are prejudiced and biased. Most of us are blighted with preconceived notions, with jealousy, suspicion, fear, envy and pride. And most citizens don’t want to change their minds about their religion or their haircut or communism or their favorite movie star. So, if you are inclined to tell people they are wrong, please read the following paragraph every morning before breakfast. It is from James Harvey Robinson’s enlightening book The Mind in the Making.

    有逻辑思维的人并不多。我们大多数人都有成见和偏见。我们大多数人都被先入为主的观念、嫉妒、怀疑、恐惧和骄傲所困扰。而大多数市民并不愿意改变他们对宗教、发型、共产主义或最喜欢的电影明星的想法。所以，如果你想要告诉人们他们错了，请在每天早餐前阅读下列段落。它出自詹姆斯·哈维·罗宾逊的启发性著作《心灵的形成》。

      We sometimes find ourselves changing our minds without any resistance or heavy emotion, but if we are told we are wrong, we resent the imputation and harden our hearts. We are incredibly heedless in the formation of our beliefs, but find ourselves filled with an illicit passion for them when anyone proposes to rob us of their companionship. It is obviously not the ideas themselves that are dear to us, but our self-esteem which is threatened …. The little word “my” is the most important one in human affairs, and properly to reckon with it is the beginning of wisdom. It has the same force whether it is “my” dinner, “my” dog, and “my” house, or “my” father, “my” country, and “my” God. We not only resent the imputation that our watch is wrong, or our car shabby, but that our conception of the canals of Mars, of the pronunciation of “Epictetus,” of the medicinal value of salicin, or of the date of Sargon I is subject to revision. We like to continue to believe what we have been accustomed to accept a true, and the resentment aroused when doubt is cast upon any of our assumptions leads us to seek every manner of excuse for clinging to it. The result is that most of our so-called reasoning consists in finding arguments for going on believing as we already do.

       我们有时发现我们自己改变了想法，没有任何阻力或沉重感，但如果我们被告知，我们错了，我们就会讨厌这种指责，并且我们的内心会变得更抵触。我们在形成观念过程中的粗心大意难以令人置信，但当有人打算剥夺我们的陪伴时，我们会发现我们对它们充满了抵触的情绪，很明显，并非是我们珍爱的想法本身，而是我们受到威胁的自尊…. “我的”这个小词是人类事务中最重要的一个词，适当地应对它是智慧的开始。无论它是“我的”晚餐，“我的”狗，以及“我的”房子，或者“我的”父亲，“我的”国家，以及“我的”神。我们不仅怨恨别人指责我们的表不准，或我们的车破旧，而且怨恨我们对火星运河的概念，对“爱比克泰德”的发音，对水扬苷的药用价值，或对萨尔贡一世的日期需要修正的指责。我们喜欢继续相信我们已习惯接受的真实，而当我们的任何假设受到质疑时就会引发怨恨，导致我们寻找各种借口来坚持它。结果是，我们大多数的所谓推理都是为了寻找继续相信我们已经相信的那些论据。

   Carl Rogers, the eminent psychologist, wrote in his book On Becoming a Person:

      著名心理学家卡尔·罗杰斯，在其《个人形成论》中写道：

       I have found it of enormous value when I can permit myself to understand the other person. The way in which I have worded this statement may seem strange to you. Is it necessary to permit oneself to understand another? I think it is. Our first reaction to most of the statements (which we hear from other people) is an evaluation or judgment, rather than an understanding of it. When someone EPRESSES some feeling, attitude or belief, our tendency is almost immediately to feel “that’s right,” or “that’s stupid,” “that’s abnormal,” “that’s unreasonable,” “that’s incorrect,” “that’s not nice.” Very rarely do we permit ourselves to understand precisely what the meaning of the statement is to the other person.

        当我允许自己理解他人时，我发现了它的巨大价值。我发表这一陈述的方式你可能很奇怪。有必要让自己去理解别人吗？我认为是的。我们对大多数陈述的第一反应（我们从别人那里听到的声明）是一种评价或判断，而不是对它的理解。当某人表达了某种感觉、态度或信念，我们的倾向几乎是立刻觉着“那是对的”或者“那是愚蠢的”，“那是不正常的”，“那是不合理的”，“那是不正确的”，“那样不好”。我们很少允许自己准确地理解那个陈述对其他人意味着什么。

I once employed an interior decorator to make some draperies for my home. When the bill arrived, I was dismayed.

我曾经雇用了一个室内装饰师为我的家做一些装饰织物。当收到账单时，我很沮丧。

A few days later, a friend dropped in and looked at the draperies. The price was mentioned, and she exclaimed with a note of triumph: “What? That’s awful. I am afraid he put one over on you.”

几天后，一位朋友偶然来访，看到了装饰织物。提到了价格，她以胜利者的音调大叫道：“什么？太可怕了。我担心是他骗了你”。

True? Yes, she had told the truth, but few people like to listen to truths that reflect on their judgment. So, being human, I tried to defend myself. I pointed out that the best is eventually the cheapest, that one can’t expect get quality and artistic taste at bargain-basement prices, and so on and on.

真的吗？是的，她说的是实话，但很少有人喜欢听那些反映他们判断的实话。人类就是这样，我试图为自己辩解。我指出，最好的最终都是最便宜的，人们不能指望以极便宜的价格获得品质和艺术品味，诸如此类。

The next day another friend dropped in, admired the draperies, bubbled over with enthusiasm, and EXPRESSED a wish that she could afford such exquisite creations for her home. My reaction was totally different. “Well, to tell the truth,” I said, “I can’t afford them myself. I paid too much. I’m sorry I ordered them.”

 第二天另一位朋友偶然来访，兴致勃勃地赞美了这些装饰织物，并表达希望她家也能买得起这样精致的作品。我的反应完全不同。“噢，说实话”我说，“我自己买不起它们。我支付的太多了。我很后悔定了它们”。

When we are wrong, we may admit it to ourselves. And if we are handled gently and tactfully, we may admit it to others and even take pride in our frankness and broad-mindedness. But not if someone else is trying to ram the unpalatable fact down our esophagus.

 当我们错了，我们可以承认我们的错。如果我们被温柔而巧妙地对待，我们可能会向他人承认，甚至以我们的坦率和心胸开阔而自豪。但如果其他人试图将令人不快的事实强加给我们，那就是另一回事了。

Horace Greeley, the most famous editor in America during the time of the Civil War, disagreed violently with Lincoln’s policies. He believed that he could drive Lincoln into agreeing with him by a campaign of argument, ridicule and abuse. He waged this bitter campaign month after month, year after year. In fact, he wrote a brutal, bitter, sarcastic and personal attack on President Lincoln the night Booth shot him.

南北战争期间美国最著名的编辑贺拉斯·格利里强烈反对林肯的政策。他认为，他能通过一场辩论、嘲笑和辱骂运动迫使林肯赞同他的观点。他月复一月，年复一年地进行激烈的活动。实际上，在布斯枪杀林肯的那个晚上，他撰写了一篇毫不掩饰，充满敌意，挖苦和人身攻击的文章。

But did all this bitterness make Lincoln agree with Greeley? Not at all. Ridicule and abuse never do.

但这所有的怨恨使林肯赞同格利里了吗？根本没有。嘲笑和辱骂永远都做不到。

（待续）

                            2023年10月19日译校

(译者注：该文译自HOW TO WIN FRIENDS & INFLUENCE PEOPLE  BY DALE CARNEGIE《如何赢得朋友和影响人们》戴尔·卡耐基著)