Decision Making

Certainly, but it might not be what you expect. Let's put it this way: Tarot cards won't give you a simple "should I change" or "shouldn't I change" answer.

Of course, this is actually a very interesting way to use them! However, Tarot cards won't tell you directly, like a food app, "Restaurant A is better than Restaurant B.

当然可以，很多人都这么做过。不过，这里面有个小小的“使用说明”需要了解一下。 塔罗牌不是一个能直接告诉你“行”或“不行”的神奇按钮。你如果直接问“我该不该向他/她表白？”，牌面可能会让你很困惑。 把它想象成一个帮你分析情况的“情感参谋”会更准确。它更擅长帮你梳理你自己的内心，以及看清当前的局势。

It's like asking: if someone offers a high price for the child you painstakingly raised, would you sell? The answer isn't that simple; it depends on why you "gave birth" to this child in the first pla...

Good question. If you think about this problem using "first principles," it's actually quite simple. It can help you strip away complex layers and see the essence.

Yes, absolutely, and this is precisely the kind of "dilemma" that first principles thinking is best at solving. To put it plainly, the reason we often perceive "equity dilution" and "control" as contr...

I find this question very interesting, let me share my thoughts. First principles don't directly give you "certainty," especially not the absolute "1+1=2" kind.

No problem, let me break this down for you. You can understand it this way: Imagine you and a group of friends are going on a long trip. In this situation, most people would "follow the crowd": "Hey, ...

Friend, this is an excellent question, one that feels unavoidable in our daily lives. When you have to make a big decision, like changing jobs, choosing a city to develop in, or whether to get married...

Of course. To put it plainly, it's like a martial arts master insisting on deriving every single move and stance from "the law of conservation of energy" and "the principles of human muscle exertion,"...

Absolutely, and it might just be a powerful tool to help you avoid a mid-life crisis. Simply put, "First Principles" means not constantly looking at others or what "everyone else is doing," but rather...

This is an excellent question because it touches upon a core contradiction in how we think and act. It's like wanting to build a ship for a long voyage, but being unable to be 100% certain if the wood...

Simply put, relying on "analogical reasoning" is like "copying homework." Think about how we usually solve problems. Most of the time, we observe how others do things, and then we follow suit, perhaps...

Okay, this is a very interesting question, and it's particularly relevant to our daily lives. Let me share my thoughts, trying to explain it in simple terms.

Okay, no problem. I really relate to this issue because I suffer from information overload myself; Naval's perspective is like a much-needed antidote.

Here’s the translation: Hi, this is an excellent question—it hits a core idea in Naval’s philosophy. Many have heard of "opportunity cost," but Naval elevates it to a strategic level.

Hey there. You asked a great question about why Naval always emphasizes "rationality in uncertainty." I’ve thought about this deeply and tripped up more than once myself.

Okay, this is a fascinating question. This point by Naval could be considered a core pillar of his philosophy. Let me try to explain it in plain language for you.

Okay, here's the translation: Core Idea: Grasp the Thickest Strand Imagine a tangled bundle of ropes in front of you, all connected to the goal you wish to move.

Okay, let's discuss Naval's point. You can think of the "noisy information" he mentions as the "junk food" of the information world. Why Does Naval Stress "Avoiding Noise Information"? Imagine your b...