آموزش زبان با پادکست

Disagreeable people don’t just challenge us to think again. Theynalso make agreeable people comfortable arguing, too. Instead ofnfleeing from friction, our grumpy colleagues engage it directly. Bynmaking it clear that they can handle a tussle, they create a norm fornthe rest of us to follow. If we’re not careful, though, what starts as ascuffle can turn into a brawl. How can we avoid that slippery slope?GETTING HOT WITHOUT GETTING MADA major problem with task conflict is that it often spills over into relationship conflict. One minute you’re disagreeing about how much seasoning to put on the Thanksgiving turkey, and the next minute you find yourself yelling “You smell!”Although the Wright brothers had a lifetime of experience discovering each other’s hot buttons, that didn’t mean they always kept their cool. Their last grand challenge before liftoff was their single hardest problem: designing a propeller. They knew their airplane couldn’t take flight without one, but the right kind didn’texist. As they struggled with various approaches, they argued back and forth for hours at a time, often raising their voices. The feuding lasted for months as each took turns preaching the merits of his own solutions and prosecuting the other’s points. Eventually theiryounger sister, Katharine, threatened to leave the house if they didn’t stop fighting. They kept at it anyway, until one night it culminated in what might have been the loudest shouting match of their lives. Strangely, the next morning, they came into the shop and actedas if nothing had happened. They picked up the argument about the propeller right where they had left off—only now without the yelling. Soon they were both rethinking their assumptions and stumbling onto what would become one of their biggest breakthroughs.The Wright brothers were masters at having intense task conflict without relationship conflict. When they raised their voices, it reflected intensity rather than hostility. As their mechanic marveled, “I don’t think they really got mad, but they sure got awfully hot.”کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   #think_day59📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 61 کتاب Think Again✅ Disagreeable people: People who are difficult or unpleasant to deal with, آدم‌های بداخلاق/سخت‌گیر✅ Think again: Rethink; reconsider an idea, دوباره فکر کردن / بازنگری کردن✅ Flee from friction: Avoid conflict or tension, فرار کردن از تنش یا درگیری✅ Engage it directly: Face a problem without avoiding it, مستقیم روبه‌رو شدن با مشکل✅ Handle a tussle: Deal with a small fight or struggle, از پس یک دعوای کوچک برآمدن✅ Create a norm: Establish a standard behavior for others to follow, ایجاد یک هنجار✅ Scuffle: A short, confused fight, درگیری یا کتک‌کاری کوچک✅ Brawl: A noisy, rough fight, دعوای پر سر و صدا و شدید✅ Slippery slope: A situation that could quickly get worse, سراشیبی خطرناک / شرایطی که بدتر می‌شود✅ Spill over into: Expand into another area (often negative), سرریز شدن به / کشیده شدن به✅ Hot buttons: Sensitive topics that trigger strong reactions, موضوعات حساس یا اعصاب‌خُردکن✅ Keep their cool: Stay calm, آرام ماندن / خونسردی خود را حفظ کردن✅ Liftoff: The moment of launch (literally or metaphorically), پرتاب / آغاز✅ Back and forth: Moving or arguing repeatedly in two directions, رفت و برگشت / جر و بحث مداوم✅ Raising their voices: Speaking louder, often in anger, صدایشان را بالا بردن✅ Feuding: Engaged in long, bitter conflict, دشمنی یا دعوای طولانی‌مدت✅ Preach the merits: Advocate for the advantages of something, تبلیغ کردن مزایا✅ Prosecute someone’s points: Argue strongly against another’s ideas, شدیداً نقد کردن نظرات کسی✅ Culminate in: End in or reach the highest point, به اوج رسیدن / ختم شدن به✅ Shouting match: A loud argument, دعوای پر از داد و فریاد✅ Acted as if nothing had happened: Pretended everything was normal, طوری رفتار کردن که انگار هیچ اتفاقی نیفتاده✅ Pick up where they left off: Continue from the same point after a pause, ادامه دادن از همان جایی که قطع شده بود✅ Rethinking assumptions: Questioning and reconsidering beliefs, بازنگری در فرضیات✅ Stumble onto: Accidentally discover, به طور اتفاقی کشف کردن✅ Breakthrough: An important discovery or achievement, پیشرفت بزرگ / کشف مهم✅ Reflect intensity rather than hostility: Show passion without anger, شدت احساسات را نشان دادن نه خصومت✅ Got awfully hot: Became very heated (emotionally), خیلی داغ شدن / هیجان‌زده شدن

After seeing their interactions up close, I finally understood what had long felt like a contradiction in my own personality: how I could be highly agreeable and still cherish a good argument. Agreeableness is about seeking social harmony, not cognitive consensus. It’s possible to disagree without being disagreeable. Although I’m terrified of hurting other people’s feelings, when it comes to challenging their thoughts, I have no fear. In fact, when I argue with someone, it’s not a display of disrespect—it’s a sign of respect. It means I value their views enough to contest them. If their opinions didn’t matter to me, I wouldn’t bother. I know I have chemistry with someone when we find it delightful to prove each other wrong. Agreeable people don’t always steer clear of conflict. They’re highly attuned to the people around them and often adapt to the norms in the room. My favorite demonstration is an experiment by my colleagues Jennifer Chatman and Sigal Barsade. Agreeable people were significantly more accommodating than disagreeable ones—as long as they were in a cooperative team. When they were assigned to a competitive team, they acted just as disagreeably as their disagreeable teammates.That’s how working with Brad Bird influenced John Walker.John’s natural tendency is to avoid conflict: at restaurants, if the waiter brings him the wrong dish, he just goes ahead and eats it anyway. “But when I’m involved in something bigger than myself,”he observes, “I feel like I have an opportunity, a responsibility really, to speak up, speak out, debate. Fight like hell when the morning whistle blows, but go out for a beer after the one at five o’clock.”That adaptability was also visible in the Wright brothers’relationship. In Wilbur, Orville had a built-in challenge network.Wilbur was known to be highly disagreeable: he was unfazed by other people’s opinions and had a habit of pouncing on anyone else’sidea the moment it was raised. Orville was known as gentle, cheerful, and sensitive to criticism. Yet those qualities seemed to vanish in his partnership with his brother. “He’s such a good scrapper,” Wilbursaid. One sleepless night Orville came up with an idea to build a rudder that was movable rather than fixed. The next morning at breakfast, as he got ready to pitch the idea to Wilbur, Orville winked at a colleague of theirs, expecting Wilbur to go into challenge mode and demolish it. Much to his surprise, Wilbur saw the potential in the idea immediately, and it became one of their major discoveries.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   #think_day59📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 60 کتاب Think Again✅ Contradiction: A combination of ideas that oppose each other, تناقض✅ Highly agreeable: Very easy to get along with, بسیار سازگار / خوش‌برخورد✅ Cherish a good argument: Deeply enjoy engaging in debates, لذت بردن از بحث خوب✅ Social harmony: Peace and balance in relationships, هماهنگی اجتماعی✅ Cognitive consensus: Agreement in thinking or ideas, توافق فکری✅ Disagree without being disagreeable: Argue without being rude or unpleasant, مخالفت کردن بدون بی‌ادبی✅ Display of disrespect: A visible sign of being rude, نشانۀ بی‌احترامی✅ Sign of respect: Evidence of valuing someone, نشانۀ احترام✅ Contest an idea: To challenge or question an idea, به چالش کشیدن یک ایده✅ Chemistry with someone: A natural connection or compatibility, ارتباط طبیعی / تفاهم داشتن✅ Prove each other wrong: Show that the other person’s idea is mistaken, اشتباه همدیگر را ثابت کردن✅ Steer clear of conflict: Avoid arguments or fights, دوری کردن از تعارض✅ Highly attuned to: Very sensitive or responsive to, بسیار هماهنگ / حساس به✅ Adapt to norms: Adjust to the accepted rules or behaviors, سازگار شدن با هنجارها✅ Significantly more accommodating: Much more willing to adjust or help, به‌طور چشمگیر سازش‌پذیرتر✅ Competitive team: A group focused on winning or outperforming others, تیم رقابتی✅ Natural tendency: Usual behavior or inclination, گرایش طبیعی✅ Speak up / speak out: Express your opinion openly, نظر خود را آشکار گفتن🔴Speak up → بیشتر به وضوح و بلندی صدا یا اعتمادبه‌نفس فردی مربوطه.🔴Speak out → بیشتر به موضع‌گیری علنی و جدی مربوطه.✅ Fight like hell: Fight very hard/with determination, سخت جنگیدن / با تمام قوا تلاش کردن✅ Built-in challenge network: A natural system of pushing each other, شبکۀ ذاتی چالش✅ Unfazed by: Not affected or bothered by, بی‌تفاوت به / بی‌تأثیر از✅ Pounce on an idea: Attack or criticize an idea immediately, به ایده حمله کردن✅ Sensitive to criticism: Easily affected by negative feedback, حساس به انتقاد✅ Go into challenge mode: Switch into a critical or argumentative mindset, وارد حالت چالشی شدن✅ Demolish an idea: Destroy or strongly disprove an idea,

DON’T AGREE TO DISAGREEHashing out competing views has potential downsides—risks that need to be managed. On the first Incredibles film, a rising star named Nicole Grindle had managed the simulation of the hair, watching John and Brad’s interactions from a distance. When Nicole came in to produce the sequel with John, one of her concerns was that the volume of the arguments between the two highlyaccomplished leaders might drown out the voices of people who were less comfortable speaking up: newcomers, introverts, women, and minorities. It’s common for people who lack power or status to shift into politician mode, suppressing their dissenting views in favor of conforming to the HIPPO—the HIghest Paid Person’s Opinion. Sometimes they have no other choice if they want to survive.To make sure their desire for approval didn’t prevent them from introducing task conflict, Nicole encouraged new people to bring their divergent ideas to the table. Some voiced them directly to the group; others went to her for feedback and support. Although Nicole wasn’t a pirate, as she found herself advocating for different perspectives she became more comfortable challenging Brad on characters and dialogue. “Brad is still the ornery guy who first came to Pixar, so you have to be ready for a spirited debate when you put forward a contrary point of view.”The notion of a spirited debate captures something important about how and why good fights happen. If you watch Brad argue with his colleagues—or the pirates fight with one another—you can quickly see that the tension is intellectual, not emotional. The tone is vigorous and feisty rather than combative or aggressive. They don’t disagree just for the sake of it; they disagree because they care. “Whether you disagree loudly, or quietly yet persistently put forward a different perspective,” Nicole explains, “we come together to support the common goal of excellence—of making great films.”کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   #think_day59📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 59 کتاب Think Again✅ Agree to disagree: Accepting that two sides won’t reach the same conclusion, موافقت با تفاوت نظر / بیخیال شدن از بحث✅ Hash out: Discuss something thoroughly to resolve it, کامل بحث کردن / سبک‌سنگین کردن✅ Potential downside: Possible disadvantage, پیامد منفی احتمالی✅ Rising star: Someone quickly gaining success or recognition, ستاره در حال ظهور / فرد موفق در حال رشد✅ From a distance: Without direct involvement, از دور / غیرمستقیم✅ Drown out: To make it impossible to hear something, صدای کسی رو خفه کردن / تحت‌الشعاع قرار دادن✅ Speak up: Express oneself openly, بلند حرف زدن / نظر دادن✅ Politician mode: Behaving diplomatically to please others, حالت سیاستمدارانه گرفتن / محافظه‌کار بودن✅ Suppress views: Hold back or hide opinions, سرکوب کردن دیدگاه‌ها✅ In favor of: Supporting one choice over another, به نفعِ / در حمایت از✅ HIPPO (Highest Paid Person’s Opinion): The tendency to follow the boss’s idea, نظر فرد با بیشترین حقوق / نظر رئیس✅ No other choice: No alternatives available, چاره‌ای نداشتن✅ Bring to the table: Offer something useful (ideas, skills), روی میز گذاشتن / ارائه دادن✅ Divergent ideas: Different or opposing ideas, ایده‌های متفاوت / متضاد✅ Feedback and support: Responses and encouragement, بازخورد و حمایت✅ Advocate for: Support or defend an idea, حمایت کردن از✅ Challenge someone: Question or oppose someone’s ideas, به چالش کشیدن✅ Contrary point of view: Opposing opinion, دیدگاه مخالف✅ Spirited debate: Lively and passionate discussion, بحث پرانرژی / پرحرارت✅ just for the sake of it: For no real reason, الکی، بی دلیل✅ Tension is intellectual, not emotional: Conflict about ideas, not personal feelings, تنش فکری نه احساسی✅ Vigorous and feisty: Strong, energetic, and lively, پرقدرت و پرهیجان✅ Common goal of excellence: Shared aim for high quality, هدف مشترک برای برتری‌

When I write a book, I like to enlist my own challenge network. I recruit a group of my most thoughtful critics and ask them to tear each chapter apart. I’ve learned that it’s important to consider their values along with their personalities—I’m looking for disagreeable people who are givers, not takers. Disagreeable givers often make thebest critics: their intent is to elevate the work, not feed their own egos. They don’t criticize because they’re insecure; they challenge because they care. They dish out tough love.*Ernest Hemingway once said, “The most essential gift for a good writer is a built-in, shock-proof sh*t detector.” My challenge network is my sh*t detector. I think of it as a good fight club. The first rule: avoiding an argument is bad manners. Silence disrespects the valueof your views and our ability to have a civil disagreement.Brad Bird lives by that rule. He has legendary arguments with his long-standing producer, John Walker. When making The Incredibles, they fought about every character detail, right down to their hair—from how receding the hairline should be on the superhero dad to whether the teenage daughter’s hair should be longand flowing. At one point, Brad wanted the baby to morph into goo, taking on a jellylike shape, but John put his foot down. It would be too difficult to animate, and they were too far behind schedule. “I’m just trying to herd you toward the finish,” John said, laughing. “I’m just trying to get us across the line, man.” Pounding his fist, Bradshot back: “I’m trying to get us across the line in first place.” Eventually John talked Brad out of it, and the goo was gone. “I love working with John, because he’ll give me the bad news straight to my face,” Brad says. “It’s good that we disagree. It’s good that we fight it out. It makes the stuff stronger.”Those fights have helped Brad win two Oscars—and made him a better learner and a better leader. For John’s part, he didn’t flat-out refuse to animate a gooey baby. He just told Brad he would have to wait a little bit. Sure enough, when they got around to releasing a sequel to The Incredibles fourteen years later, the baby got into a fight with a raccoon and transformed into goo. That scene might be the hardest I’ve ever seen my kids laugh.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   #think_day56📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 58 کتاب Think Again✅ Enlist: To engage someone’s help or support, به خدمت گرفتن / کمک گرفتن✅ Challenge network: A group that provides honest, critical feedback, شبکه‌ی چالش / گروه منتقدان سازنده✅ Tear apart: To criticize strongly and in detail, به شدت نقد کردن / تیکه‌پاره کردن✅ Disagreeable people: People who are tough, critical, not always pleasant, آدم‌های سخت‌گیر و مخالف✅ Givers, not takers: People who contribute instead of exploiting, بخشنده‌ها، نه بهره‌کش‌ها✅ Disagreeable givers: Critical people with good intentions, منتقدان سخت‌گیر خیرخواه✅ Elevate the work: To improve and raise quality, سطح کار را بالا بردن✅ Feed their own egos: To satisfy one’s pride or selfishness, خودخواهی و غرور خود را تغذیه کردن✅ Dish out tough love: Give strict feedback with good intentions, محبت سخت‌گیرانه نشان دادن✅ Shock-proof detector: A tool/instinct that works even under stress, آشکارساز مقاوم در برابر شوک✅ Fight club: A group where open conflict or debate is encouraged, باشگاه دعوا / فضای بحث آزاد✅ Avoiding an argument is bad manners: Not debating shows disrespect, بحث نکردن بی‌احترامی است✅ Civil disagreement: Respectful and constructive conflict, اختلاف محترمانه✅ Legendary arguments: Famous or intense debates, بحث‌های افسانه‌ای / دعواهای معروف✅ Long-standing producer: Someone who has worked for many years, تهیه‌کننده باسابقه✅ Put his foot down: To be firm and refuse, قاطعانه مخالفت کردن✅ Herd someone toward the finish: To guide someone to complete a task, کسی را به سمت پایان کار هدایت کردن✅ Get across the line: To finish successfully, به خط پایان رساندن✅ Across the line in first place: To win, به خط پایان رسیدن به عنوان نفر اول✅ straight to my face: Directly , رک گفتن✅ Fight it out: Argue until a solution is reached, بحث کردن تا رسیدن به نتیجه✅ Flat-out refuse: Totally reject, قاطعانه رد کردن✅ Talk someone out of (something): Persuade someone not to do it, کسی را منصرف کردن✅ Sure enough: As expected, درست همان‌طور که انتظار می‌رفت✅ Sequel: A continuation of a movie/book, دنباله (فیلم/کتاب)✅ Hardest I’ve ever seen: Strongest/most extreme I’ve witnessed, شدیدترین چیزی که تا حالا دیده‌ام‌

I’ve watched too many leaders shield themselves from task conflict. As they gain power, they tune out boat-rockers and listen to bootlickers. They become politicians, surrounding themselves with agreeable yes-men and becoming more susceptible to seduction bysycophants. Research reveals that when their firms perform poorly, CEOs who indulge flattery and conformity become overconfident.They stick to their existing strategic plans instead of changing course —which sets them on a collision course with failure.We learn more from people who challenge our thought process than those who affirm our conclusions. Strong leaders engage their critics and make themselves stronger. Weak leaders silence their critics and make themselves weaker. This reaction isn’t limited to people in power. Although we might be on board with the principle, in practice we often miss out on the value of a challenge network.In one experiment, when people were criticized rather than praised by a partner, they were over four times more likely to requesta new partner. Across a range of workplaces, when employeesreceived tough feedback from colleagues, their default response was to avoid those coworkers or drop them from their networks altogether—and their performance suffered over the following year.Some organizations and occupations counter those tendencies by building challenge networks into their cultures. From time to time the Pentagon and the White House have used aptly named “murderboards” to stir up task conflict, enlisting tough-minded committees to shoot down plans and candidates. At X, Google’s “moonshot factory,” there’s a rapid evaluation team that’s charged with rethinking proposals: members conduct independent assessmentsand only advance the ones that emerge as both audacious and achievable. In science, a challenge network is often a cornerstone of the peer-review process. We submit articles anonymously, and they’re reviewed blindly by independent experts. I’ll never forget the rejection letter I once received in which one of the reviewers encouraged me to go back and read the work of Adam Grant. Dude, I am Adam Grant.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   #think_day56📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 57 کتاب Think Again✅ Shield oneself from: To protect oneself from something, خود را محافظت کردن از✅ Task conflict: Disagreements about the work or task itself, تعارض کاری / اختلاف نظر کاری✅ Tune out: To ignore or stop paying attention, نادیده گرفتن / گوش ندادن✅ Boat-rocker: A person who challenges the status quo, کسی که وضع موجود رو به هم می‌زنه / معترض✅ Bootlicker: Someone who flatters powerful people for advantage, چاپلوس / پاچه‌خوار✅ Yes-man: Someone who always agrees with the boss, آدم بله‌قربان‌گو✅ Sycophant: Someone who excessively flatters powerful people, چاپلوس متملق✅ Indulge flattery: To accept or enjoy excessive praise, غرق شدن در چاپلوسی✅ Conformity: Behavior that follows rules or social norms, همرنگی / پیروی کورکورانه✅ Overconfident: Too sure of oneself, بیش از حد مطمئن به خود✅ Changing course: Altering the direction or plan, تغییر مسیر / تغییر برنامه✅ Collision course with failure: Headed toward certain failure, در مسیر حتمی شکست✅ Challenge our thought process: Question how we think, به چالش کشیدن طرز فکر✅ Engage critics: Interact constructively with critics, با منتقدان درگیر شدن (سازنده)✅ Silence critics: To shut down or ignore criticism, منتقدان را ساکت کردن / نادیده گرفتن✅ To be on board with: To agree with or support, موافق بودن با چیزی✅ Miss out on: Fail to take advantage of, از دست دادن فرصت✅ Challenge network: A group that gives tough feedback, شبکه چالشی / شبکه منتقد✅ Default response: Usual or automatic reaction, واکنش پیش‌فرض✅ Drop someone from network: Remove from professional circle, حذف کردن کسی از شبکه ارتباطی✅ Counter tendencies: To oppose or balance common habits, مقابله کردن با گرایش‌ها✅ Murder board: A group assembled to critically evaluate ideas, هیئت سخت‌گیر ارزیاب✅ Shoot down plans: To strongly reject ideas, رد کردن قاطعانه‌ی برنامه‌ها✅ Moonshot: A highly ambitious project, پروژه بلندپروازانه✅ Audacious: Bold and daring, جسورانه / بی‌پروا✅ Achievable: Possible to accomplish, دست‌یافتنی✅ Cornerstone: Essential foundation, سنگ‌بنای اصلی✅ Peer-review process: Evaluation by experts in the same field, فرایند داوری همتا✅ Rejection letter: Official letter saying your work was not accepted, نامه رد / عدم پذیرش

Before Brad Bird arrived, Pixar already had a track record of encouraging talented people to push boundaries. But the studio’s previous films had starred toys, bugs, and monsters, which were relatively simple to animate. Since making a whole film with lifelike human superheroes was beyond the capabilities of computeranimation at the time, the technical teams balked at Brad’s vision for The Incredibles. That’s when he created his challenge network. He enlisted his band of pirates to foster task conflict and rethink the process.Brad gathered the pirates in Pixar’s theater and told them that although a bunch of bean counters and corporate suits might not believe in them, he did. After rallying them he went out of his way to seek out their ideas. “I want people who are disgruntled because they have a better way of doing things and they are having trouble finding an avenue,” Brad told me. “Racing cars that are just spinning their wheels in a garage rather than racing. You open that garage door, and man, those people will take you somewhere.” The pirates rose to the occasion, finding economical alternatives to expensive techniques and easy workarounds for hard problems. When it came time to animate the superhero family, they didn’t toil over the intricate contours of interlocking muscles. Instead they figured out that sliding simple oval shapes against one another could become the building blocks of complex muscles.When I asked Brad how he recognized the value of pirates, he told me it was because he is one. Growing up, when he went to dinner at friends’ houses, he was taken aback by the polite questionstheir parents asked about their day at school. Bird family dinners were more like a food fight, where they all vented, debated, and spoke their minds. Brad found the exchanges contentious but fun, and he brought that mentality into his first dream job at Disney.From an early age, he had been mentored and trained by a group of old Disney masters to put quality first, and he was frustrated that their replacements—who now supervised the new generation at the studio—weren’t upholding the same standards. Within a few months of launching his animation career at Disney, Brad was criticizing senior leaders for taking on conventional projects and producing substandard work. They told him to be quiet and do his job. When he refused, they fired him.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   #think_day56📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 56 کتاب Think Again✅ Track record: A history of achievements or performance, سابقه‌ی کاری/عملکرد✅ Push boundaries: To go beyond normal limits, مرزها رو جابه‌جا کردن / فراتر رفتن✅ Relatively simple: Comparatively easy, نسبتاً ساده✅ Beyond the capabilities: More than what is possible, فراتر از توانایی‌ها✅ Balked at: Refused or resisted something, مخالفت کردن / پس زدن✅ Vision for: A plan or idea for the future, چشم‌انداز / دیدگاه✅ Challenge network: Group that questions and improves ideas, شبکه‌ی چالش‌گر✅ Foster task conflict: Encourage debate about work, پرورش تضاد سازنده در کار✅ Rethink the process: Consider a new way of doing things, بازنگری در روند✅ Bean counters: People focused only on money/numbers, آدم‌های حسابگر / کارمندان مالی✅ Corporate suits: Business executives in formal roles, مدیران رسمی شرکت✅ Rallying them: Motivating or inspiring people, برانگیختن / تهییج کردن✅ Go out of one’s way: Make special effort, زحمت اضافی کشیدن / تلاش ویژه کردن✅ Seek out: To search for actively, جستجو کردن / دنبال چیزی بودن✅ Disgruntled: Dissatisfied, ناراضی / دلخور✅ An avenue: A path or opportunity, راه / مسیر (برای پیشرفت)✅ Spinning their wheels: Wasting time without progress, درجا زدن / وقت تلف کردن✅ Rise to the occasion: Succeed under pressure, از پس شرایط سخت برآمدن✅ Economical alternatives: Cost-effective solutions, جایگزین‌های مقرون‌به‌صرفه✅ Workarounds: Quick or temporary solutions, راه‌حل موقتی / دور زدن مشکل✅ Toil over: Work very hard on something, سخت کار کردن روی چیزی✅ Building blocks: Basic components of something, اجزای پایه / بلوک‌های سازنده✅ Taken aback: Surprised or shocked, جا خوردن / غافلگیر شدن✅ Polite questions: Courteous, respectful inquiries, سؤال‌های مودبانه✅ Vented: Expressed strong feelings, تخلیه‌ی احساسات / غر زدن✅ Contentious: Causing argument, بحث‌برانگیز✅ Dream job: An ideal or desired job, شغل رویایی✅ Mentored and trained: Guided and taught, آموزش دیدن / راهنمایی شدن✅ Put quality first: Prioritize quality above all, کیفیت رو در اولویت گذاشتن✅ Upholding standards: Maintaining rules or quality, حفظ استانداردها✅ Launching a career: Starting a career, شروع کردن حرفه✅ Conventional projects: Traditional, not innovative, پروژه‌های سنتی / تکراری✅ Substandard work: Low-quality work, کار بی‌کیفیت / پایین‌تر از استاندارد✅ Be quiet and do your job: Obey without complaining, ساکت شو و کارت رو بکن✅ Fired him: Dismissed from a job, اخراجش کردن

Brad wasn’t ready to give up. He sought out the biggest misfits at Pixar for his project—people who were disagreeable, disgruntled, and dissatisfied. Some called them black sheep. Others called them pirates. When Brad rounded them up, he warned them that no onebelieved they could pull off the project. Just four years later, his team didn’t only succeed in releasing Pixar’s most complex film ever; they actually managed to lower the cost of production per minute. The Incredibles went on to gross upwards of $631 million worldwide andwon the Oscar for Best Animated Feature.Notice what Brad didn’t do. He didn’t stock his team withagreeable people. Agreeable people make for a great support network: they’re excited to encourage us and cheerlead for us.Rethinking depends on a different kind of network: a challenge network, a group of people we trust to point out our blind spots and help us overcome our weaknesses. Their role is to activate rethinking cycles by pushing us to be humble about our expertise, doubt our knowledge, and be curious about new perspectives.The ideal members of a challenge network are disagreeable, because they’re fearless about questioning the way things have always been done and holding us accountable for thinking again.There’s evidence that disagreeable people speak up more frequently —especially when leaders aren’t receptive—and foster more task conflict. They’re like the doctor in the show House or the boss in the film The Devil Wears Prada. They give the critical feedback we might not want to hear, but need to hear. Harnessing disagreeable people isn’t always easy. It helps if certain conditions are in place. Studies in oil drilling and tech companies suggest that dissatisfaction promotes creativity only whenpeople feel committed and supported—and that cultural misfits are most likely to add value when they have strong bonds with their colleagues.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   #think_day55📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 55 کتاب Think Again✅ Give up: To stop trying, تسلیم شدن / دست کشیدن✅ Seek out: To look for and find with effort, جستجو کردن / دنبال چیزی رفتن✅ Misfit: A person who doesn’t fit in with others, آدم ناسازگار / متفاوت✅ Disagreeable: Unpleasant or hard to get along with, بدعنق / ناسازگار✅ Disgruntled: Unhappy and dissatisfied, ناراضی / دلخور✅ Dissatisfied: Not pleased with something, ناراضی / ناخشنود✅ Black sheep: An outcast; the odd or undesirable member of a group, آدم متفاوت یا مایه ننگ خانواده/گروه✅ Round up: To gather people or things together, جمع کردن / دور هم آوردن✅ Pull off (something): To succeed in doing something difficult, از پس چیزی برآمدن✅ Gross upwards of: To earn more than a certain amount (often with money), درآمد داشتن بیش از✅ Support network: A group of people who give help and encouragement, شبکه حمایتی✅ Cheerlead for (someone): To encourage or support enthusiastically, تشویق کردن / حمایت پرشور✅ Blind spot: An area of weakness or something one cannot see, نقطه کور / ضعف✅ Overcome weaknesses: To defeat or improve personal shortcomings, بر ضعف‌ها غلبه کردن✅ Rethinking cycles: Repeated processes of reconsidering ideas, چرخه‌های بازاندیشی✅ Hold (someone) accountable: To make someone responsible for their actions, مسئول دانستن کسی✅ Speak up: To express opinions openly and confidently, صریح صحبت کردن / نظر دادن✅ Critical feedback: Honest evaluation, often pointing out flaws, بازخورد انتقادی✅ Harnessing people: Effectively using people’s abilities or energy, بهره‌گیری از افراد✅ Cultural misfit: A person who doesn’t adapt to the culture of an organization, ناسازگار فرهنگی✅ Add value: To make a positive contribution, ارزش افزوده ایجاد کردن✅ Strong bonds: Close relationships, روابط محکم / پیوند قوی

THE PLIGHT OF THE PEOPLE PLEASERAs long as I can remember, I’ve been determined to keep the peace. Maybe it’s because my group of friends dropped me in middle school. Maybe it’s genetic. Maybe it’s because my parents got divorced. Whatever the cause, in psychology there’s a name for my affliction.It’s called agreeableness, and it’s one of the major personality traits around the world. Agreeable people tend to be nice. Friendly. Polite. Canadian.*My first impulse is to avoid even the most trivial of conflicts. When I’m riding in an Uber and the air-conditioning is blasting, I struggle to bring myself to ask the driver to turn it down—I just sit there shivering in silence until my teeth start to chatter. When someone steps on my shoe, I’ve actually apologized forinconveniently leaving my foot in his path. When students fill out course evaluations, one of their most common complaints is that I’m “too supportive of stupid comments.”Disagreeable people tend to be more critical, skeptical, and challenging—and they’re more likely than their peers to become engineers and lawyers. They’re not just comfortable with conflict; it energizes them. If you’re highly disagreeable, you might be happierin an argument than in a friendly conversation. That quality often comes with a bad rap: disagreeable people get stereotyped as curmudgeons who complain about every idea, or Dementors who suck the joy out of every meeting. When I studied Pixar, though, I came away with a dramatically different view.In 2000, Pixar was on fire. Their teams had used computers to rethink animation in their first blockbuster, Toy Story, and they were fresh off two more smash hits. Yet the company’s founders weren’t content to rest on their laurels. They recruited an outside director named Brad Bird to shake things up. Brad had just releasedhis debut film, which was well reviewed but flopped at the box office, so he was itching to do something big and bold. When he pitched his vision, the technical leadership at Pixar said it was impossible: they would need a decade and $500 million to make it.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 54 کتاب Think Again✅ Plight: A difficult or unfortunate situation, گرفتاری✅ People pleaser: Someone who tries hard to make others happy, usually at the expense of their own well-being, آدمی که همیشه سعی می‌کند دیگران را راضی کند✅ Keep the peace: To prevent or stop arguments or conflict, آرام نگه داشتن اوضاع✅ Dropped me: To stop associating with someone or stop being friends, مرا ترک کردند✅ Genetic: Relating to genes or heredity, ژنتیکی✅ Affliction: A condition of pain or suffering, رنج✅ Agreeableness: The quality of being pleasant, friendly, and easy to get along with, خوش‌برخوردی✅ Impulse: A sudden strong desire or urge to do something, انگیزه ناگهانی✅ Trivial: Not important or serious, جزئی✅ Struggle to: To find something difficult or challenging to do, تلاش کردن برای✅ Bring oneself to: To force oneself to do something, خود را وادار کردن به✅ Chatter: To make rapid, repetitive sounds, especially teeth clattering due to cold, دندان قروچه کردن✅ Course evaluations: Forms used by students to assess a course or teacher, ارزیابی‌های دوره✅ Disagreeable: Unpleasant, uncooperative, and not easy to get along with, ناخوشایند✅ Skeptical: Doubtful or uncertain about something, شکاک✅ Energizes: To give energy or motivation to something or someone, انرژی دادن✅ Bad rap: An unfair negative reputation or criticism, شهرت بد✅ Curmudgeon: A person who is easily annoyed or critical, فرد بدخلق✅ Suck the joy out of: To make something less enjoyable or take away the fun, از بین بردن لذت چیزی✅ Rest on their laurels: To stop trying after achieving success, از تلاش دست کشیدن پس از موفقیت✅ Smash hits: Extremely successful films, songs, or events, موفقیت‌های بزرگ✅ Determined: Decided and committed to achieving something, مصمم✅ Blasting: Making a loud, powerful noise, به شدت و با صدای بلند✅ Shivering: Trembling or shaking due to cold or fear, لرزیدن✅ Inconveniently: In a way that causes difficulty or trouble, به شکل ناراحت‌کننده✅ Stereotyped: Having a fixed or oversimplified image or idea, کلیشه‌ای✅ Complain: To express dissatisfaction or annoyance, شکایت کردن✅ Dramatically: In a way that is very noticeable or extreme, به طور چشمگیر✅ Blockbuster: A highly successful movie, book, or product, موفقیت بزرگ✅ Shake things up: To change or disrupt a situation or system, تغییرات اساسی ایجاد کردن✅ Debut film: The first film made by a director or actor, فیلم اولین✅ Flopped: To fail or be unsuccessful, شکست خوردن✅ Itching to do sth: To be eager or excited to do something, اشتیاق داشتن برای انجام کاری✅ Pitch sth (vision): To present or propose an idea or plan, ارائه دادن (دیدگاه)

Being able to have a good fight doesn’t just make us more civil; it also develops our creative muscles. In a classic study, highly creative architects were more likely than their technically competent but less original peers to come from homes with plenty of friction. They oftengrew up in households that were “tense but secure,” as psychologist Robert Albert notes: “The creative person-to-be comes from a family that is anything but harmonious, one with a ‘wobble.’” The parents weren’t physically or verbally abusive, but they didn’t shy away fromconflict, either. Instead of telling their children to be seen but not heard, they encouraged them to stand up for themselves. The kids learned to dish it out—and take it. That’s exactly what happened to Wilbur and Orville Wright. When the Wright brothers said they thought together, what they really meant is that they fought together. Arguing was the family business. Although their father was a bishop in the local church, he included books by atheists in his library—and encouraged the children to read and debate them. They developed the courage tofight for their ideas and the resilience to lose a disagreement without losing their resolve. When they were solving problems, they had arguments that lasted not just for hours but for weeks and months ata time. They didn’t have such incessant spats because they were angry. They kept quarreling because they enjoyed it and learned from the experience. “I like scrapping with Orv,” Wilbur reflected. As you’ll see, it was one of their most passionate and prolonged arguments that led them to rethink a critical assumption that had prevented humans from soaring through the skies.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 53 کتاب Think Again✅ Have a good fight: Argue constructively, in a healthy way, دعوای سازنده داشتن✅ More civil: More polite and respectful, مودب‌تر / بافرهنگ‌تر✅ Creative muscles: The ability to think creatively, توانایی خلاقیت✅ Classic study: Well-known or famous research, مطالعه‌ی کلاسیک / پژوهش معروف✅ Highly creative: Very imaginative and original, بسیار خلاق✅ Technically competent: Skilled in technical aspects, از نظر فنی توانمند✅ Less original peers: Colleagues with fewer new ideas, همتایان با خلاقیت کمتر✅ Plenty of friction: A lot of conflict or tension, اصطکاک زیاد / تنش زیاد✅ Tense but secure: Stressful yet safe, پرتنش اما امن✅ Anything but harmonious: Not peaceful at all, اصلاً هماهنگ نبودن✅ A wobble: A small instability or problem, لغزش / بی‌ثباتی کوچک✅ Shy away from conflict: Avoid conflict, از درگیری پرهیز کردن✅ Be seen but not heard: Expected to stay quiet, دیده بشن اما سکوت کنن✅ Stand up for themselves: Defend their own rights/ideas, از خودشون دفاع کردن✅ Dish it out—and take it: Criticize and accept criticism, انتقاد کردن و انتقاد پذیرفتن✅ Arguing was the family business: Arguing was a common practice in the family, بحث کردن رسم خانوادگی بود✅ Fight for their ideas: Defend and support their ideas, برای ایده‌هاشون جنگیدن✅ Lose a disagreement without losing their resolve: Accept losing an argument but stay determined, باختن توی بحث اما از عزم نیفتادن✅ Incessant spats: Constant small arguments, مشاجرات بی‌وقفه / دعواهای کوچک مداوم✅ Quarreling: Arguing, جر و بحث کردن✅ Scrapping with: Fighting or arguing playfully with, سرشاخ شدن / کل‌کل کردن✅ Passionate and prolonged arguments: Intense and long-lasting arguments, بحث‌های پرشور و طولانی✅ Rethink a critical assumption: Reconsider an important belief, بازنگری در یک فرضیه‌ی حیاتی✅ Soaring through the skies: Flying high, پرواز کردن در آسمان

All in all, more than a hundred studies have examined conflicttypes in over eight thousand teams. A meta-analysis of those studiesshowed that relationship conflict is generally bad for performance,but some task conflict can be beneficial: it’s been linked to highercreativity and smarter choices. For example, there’s evidence thatwhen teams experience moderate task conflict early on, theygenerate more original ideas in Chinese technology companies,innovate more in Dutch delivery services, and make better decisionsin American hospitals. As one research team concluded, “Theabsence of conflict is not harmony, it’s apathy.”Relationship conflict is destructive in part because it stands inthe way of rethinking. When a clash gets personal and emotional, webecome self-righteous preachers of our own views, spitefulprosecutors of the other side, or single-minded politicians whodismiss opinions that don’t come from our side. Task conflict can beconstructive when it brings diversity of thought, preventing us fromgetting trapped in overconfidence cycles. It can help us stay humble,surface doubts, and make us curious about what we might bemissing. That can lead us to think again, moving us closer to thetruth without damaging our relationships.Although productive disagreement is a critical life skill, it’s onethat many of us never fully develop. The problem starts early:parents disagree behind closed doors, fearing that conflict will makechildren anxious or somehow damage their character. Yet researchshows that how often parents argue has no bearing on theirchildren’s academic, social, or emotional development. What mattersis how respectfully parents argue, not how frequently. Kids whoseparents clash constructively feel more emotionally safe in elementaryschool, and over the next few years they actually demonstrate morehelpfulness and compassion toward their classmates.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 52 کتاب Think Again✅ All in all: Considering everything, در کل / مجموعاً✅ Meta-analysis: A study that combines the results of many studies, فراتحلیل✅ Relationship conflict: Personal or emotional disagreement between people, تعارض رابطه‌ای / اختلاف شخصی✅ Task conflict: Disagreement about the work or tasks, تعارض کاری / اختلاف وظیفه‌ای✅ Linked to: Connected or associated with, مرتبط با✅ Original ideas: New and creative thoughts, ایده‌های نو / خلاقانه✅ Make better decisions: Choose more wisely, تصمیمات بهتری گرفتن✅ The absence of conflict: When there is no conflict, نبود تعارض✅ Harmony: Peaceful agreement, هماهنگی / سازگاری✅ Apathy: Lack of interest or concern, بی‌تفاوتی✅ Clash gets personal: A disagreement turns into a personal fight, دعوا شخصی شدن✅ Self-righteous: Believing one is morally right and superior, خودحق‌پندار / خودبرحق‌بین✅ Spiteful prosecutors: People who attack others out of bitterness, دادستان‌های کینه‌توز / افراد کینه‌جو✅ Single-minded politicians: People who only push their own agenda, سیاستمداران یک‌دنده✅ Dismiss opinions: Reject others’ views, نادیده گرفتن نظرات✅ Diversity of thought: Having different ways of thinking, تنوع فکری✅ Overconfidence cycles: Repeated patterns of being too sure of oneself, چرخه‌های اعتماد به نفس کاذب✅ Surface doubts: Bring up or express doubts, بروز دادن تردیدها✅ Think again: Reconsider, دوباره فکر کردن✅ Productive disagreement: A useful and constructive argument, اختلاف سازنده✅ Critical life skill: An essential ability for life, مهارت حیاتی زندگی✅ Behind closed doors: In private, پشت درهای بسته / پنهانی✅ Has no bearing on: Has no effect or influence on, تأثیری ندارد بر✅ Clash constructively: Argue in a useful and respectful way, دعوا یا اختلاف سازنده داشتن✅ Feel emotionally safe: To feel secure in expressing emotions, احساس امنیت عاطفی داشتن✅ Demonstrate helpfulness and compassion: Show kindness and care, مهربانی و دلسوزی نشان دادن

One of the world’s leading experts on conflict is anorganizational psychologist in Australia named Karen “Etty” Jehn. When you think about conflict, you’re probably picturing what Etty calls relationship conflict—personal, emotional clashes that are filled not just with friction but also with animosity. I hate your stinking guts. I’ll use small words so that you’ll be sure to understand, you warthog-faced buffoon. You bob for apples in the toilet . . . and you like it.But Etty has identified another flavor called task conflict—clashes about ideas and opinions. We have task conflict when we’re debating whom to hire, which restaurant to pick for dinner, or whether to name our child Gertrude or Quasar. The question is whether the two types of conflict have different consequences.A few years ago I surveyed hundreds of new teams in Silicon Valley on conflict several times during their first six months working together. Even if they argued constantly and agreed on nothing else, they agreed on what kind of conflict they were having. When their projects were finished, I asked their managers to evaluate each team’s effectiveness. The teams that performed poorly started with more relationship conflict than task conflict. They entered into personal feuds early on and were so busy disliking one another that they didn’t feel comfortable challenging one another. It took months for many of theteams to make real headway on their relationship issues, and by the time they did manage to debate key decisions, it was often too late to rethink their directions.What happened in the high-performing groups? As you might expect, they started with low relationship conflict and kept it low throughout their work together. That didn’t stop them from having task conflict at the outset: they didn’t hesitate to surface competing perspectives. As they resolved some of their differences of opinion,they were able to align on a direction and carry out their work until they ran into new issues to debate.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 51 کتاب Think Again✅ Leading expert: A person who is one of the best in a particular field, کارشناس برجسته✅ Organizational psychologist: A psychologist who studies human behavior in workplaces, روان‌شناس سازمانی✅ Relationship conflict: Disagreements based on personal or emotional issues, تعارض رابطه‌ای✅ Filled with animosity: Full of strong dislike or hostility, پر از خصومت✅ Task conflict: Disagreements about ideas, opinions, or tasks, تعارض وظیفه‌ای✅ Clashes about ideas: Strong disagreements regarding thoughts or concepts, برخورد نظرات✅ Debating: Discussing different opinions, often to reach a decision, بحث کردن✅ Different consequences: Different results or effects, پیامدهای متفاوت✅ Surveyed hundreds of teams: Collected information from many groups by asking questions, نظرسنجی از صدها تیم✅ Working together: Collaborating with others, همکاری کردن✅ Evaluate effectiveness: Judge how well something works or achieves goals, ارزیابی اثربخشی✅ Performed poorly: Did badly or with low quality, عملکرد ضعیف داشتن✅ Personal feuds: Ongoing and bitter personal disputes, دشمنی‌های شخصی✅ Challenging one another: Questioning or testing each other’s ideas, به چالش کشیدن یکدیگر✅ Make real headway: Make significant progress, پیشرفت قابل توجه داشتن✅ Debate key decisions: Discuss important choices, بحث درباره تصمیمات کلیدی✅ High-performing groups: Teams that work very successfully, گروه‌های با عملکرد بالا✅ Surface competing perspectives: Bring up and share different or opposing viewpoints, مطرح کردن دیدگاه‌های متفاوت✅ Differences of opinion: Disagreement in ideas or beliefs, اختلاف نظر✅ Align on a direction: Agree on a shared plan or course of action, هماهنگ شدن روی یک مسیر✅ Ran into new issues: Encountered new problems, برخورد با مشکلات جدید

The Good Fight ClubThe Psychology of Constructive ConflictArguments are extremely vulgar, for everybody in goodsociety holds exactly the same opinions.As the two youngest boys in a big family, the bishop’s sons did everything together. They launched a newspaper and built their own printing press together. They opened a bicycle shop and then started manufacturing their own bikes together. And after years of toiling away at a seemingly impossible problem, they invented the first successful airplane together.Wilbur and Orville Wright first caught the flying bug when their father brought home a toy helicopter. After it broke, they built one of their own. As they advanced from playing together to working together to rethinking human flight together, there was no trace of sibling rivalry between them. Wilbur even said they “thought together.” Even though it was Wilbur who launched the project, the brothers shared equal credit for their achievement. When it came time to decide who would pilot their historic flight at Kitty Hawk, they just flipped a coin.New ways of thinking often spring from old bonds. The comedic chemistry of Tina Fey and Amy Poehler can be traced back to their early twenties, when they immediately hit it off in an improv class.The musical harmony of the Beatles started even earlier, when they were in high school. Just minutes after a mutual friend introduced them, Paul McCartney was teaching John Lennon how to tune a guitar. Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream grew out of a friendship between the two founders that began in seventh-grade gym class. It seems that to make progress together, we need to be in sync. But the truth, like all truths, is more complicated.✅ Hit it off: To get along very well with someone immediately, از همان ابتدا دوست شدن، جور شدن✅ Trace: To find the origin or cause of something, ردیابی کردن، دنبال کردن✅ Get (catch) the bug: To become very interested or passionate about something, علاقه‌مند شدن به چیزی✅ Toil away: To work very hard for a long time, سخت کار کردن✅ Printing press: A machine for printing texts or images, دستگاه چاپ پرسی✅ Launched a project: To start or initiate a new project, شروع یک پروژه✅ Seemingly impossible: Appearing to be impossible, ظاهراً غیرممکن✅ Sibling rivalry: Competition or conflict between brothers or sisters, رقابت یا دشمنی بین خواهر و برادر✅ Shared equal credit: To give equal recognition to all involved, تقسیم اعتبار به طور مساوی✅ Flip a coin: To toss a coin to make a decision, تصمیم‌گیری با پرتاب سکه✅ New ways of thinking: Innovative or fresh ideas, روش‌های جدید تفکر✅ Comedic chemistry: A natural and effective connection between comedians, هماهنگی طنزآمیز✅ Hit it off in an improv class: Became close quickly while practicing improvisation, دوست شدن سریع در کلاس بداهه‌پردازی✅ Musical harmony: The pleasant combination of different musical notes, هماهنگی موسیقیایی✅ Mutual friend: A friend shared by two people, دوست مشترک✅ Grew out of: Developed from something, ناشی شدن از✅ In sync: Working or happening at the same time or in agreement, هماهنگ بودن✅ Historic flight: A flight that is important in history, پرواز تاریخی✅ Pilot: To control or fly an aircraft, خلبانی کردن✅ Improv class: A class for learning improvisation, کلاس بداهه‌پردازی

Ted Kaczynski became a math professor turned anarchist and domestic terrorist. He mailed bombs that killed three people and injured twenty-three more. An eighteen-year-long FBI investigation culminated in his arrest after The New York Times and The Washington Post published his manifesto and his brother recognized his writing. He is now serving life in prison without parole.The excerpt I quoted earlier was from Kaczynski’s manifesto. If you read the entire document, you’re unlikely to be unsettled by the content or the structure. What’s disturbing is the level of conviction.Kaczynski displays little consideration of alternative views, barely a hint that he might be wrong. Consider just the opening:The Industrial Revolution and its consequences havebeen a disaster for the human race. . . . They havedestabilized society, have made life unfulfilling. . . . Thecontinued development of technology will worsen thesituation. It will certainly subject human beings to greaterindignities and inflict greater damage on the naturalworld. . . . If the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system. . . .Kaczynski’s case leaves many questions about his mental health unanswered. Still, I can’t help but wonder: If he had learned to question his opinions, would he still have been able to justify resorting to violence? If he had developed the capacity to discover that he was wrong, would he still have ended up doing something so wrong?Every time we encounter new information, we have a choice. We can attach our opinions to our identities and stand our ground in the stubbornness of preaching and prosecuting. Or we can operate more like scientists, defining ourselves as people committed to the pursuitof truth—even if it means proving our own views wrong.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 49 کتاب Think Again ✅ Turned anarchist: Became an anarchist (rejecting government and authority), تبدیل‌شده به آنارشیست / شورشی✅ Domestic terrorist: A person who uses violence against their own country, تروریست داخلی✅ Mail bombs: Explosive devices sent by mail, بمب‌های پستی✅ Culminated in: Ended in or resulted in (something important), منجر شد به✅ Recognize someone's writing: Identify a person by their writing style, شناسایی سبک نوشتاری✅ Serve life in prison (without parole): Spend the rest of one's life in jail, without chance of release, محکوم به حبس ابد (بدون آزادی مشروط)✅ Excerpt: A short part taken from a text, گزیده✅ Be unsettled by: Feel emotionally disturbed or uncomfortable about something, ناراحت یا نگران شدن از چیزی✅ Disturbing: Causing anxiety or worry, نگران‌کننده / آزاردهنده✅ Level of conviction: Strength of belief, شدت باور✅ Little consideration of: Not much thought or attention given to something, بی‌توجهی به✅ Destabilize society: Make society unstable or chaotic, بی‌ثبات کردن جامعه✅ Unfulfilling life: A life that lacks satisfaction, زندگی بدون رضایت✅ Inflict damage on: Cause harm or destruction, وارد کردن آسیب✅ Natural world: The environment and nature, دنیای طبیعی✅ Mental health: A person’s emotional and psychological condition, سلامت روان✅ Resort to violence: Turn to using violence as a solution, متوسل شدن به خشونت✅ Question one’s opinions: Critically examine what you believe, زیر سوال بردن باورهای خود✅ Stand our ground: Refuse to change our opinion, ایستادگی کردن روی موضع✅ Stubbornness: Refusing to change your mind, لجاجت✅ Preaching and prosecuting: Forcing your views on others and attacking theirs, موعظه کردن و محکوم کردن دیگران✅ Pursuit of truth: Actively looking for what is true, جستجوی حقیقت✅ Prove one’s views wrong: Show that your previous beliefs were incorrect, اشتباه بودن باورهای خود را ثابت کردن

When we find out we might be wrong, a standard defense is “I’m entitled to my opinion.” I’d like to modify that: yes, we’re entitled to hold opinions inside our own heads. If we choose to express them out loud, though, I think it’s our responsibility to ground them in logic and facts, share our reasoning with others, and change our minds when better evidence emerges.This philosophy takes us back to the Harvard students who had their worldviews attacked in that unethical study by Henry Murray.If I had to guess, I’d say the students who enjoyed the experience had a mindset similar to that of great scientists and superforecasters.They saw challenges to their opinions as an exciting opportunity to develop and evolve their thinking. The students who found it stressful didn’t know how to detach. Their opinions were their identities. An assault on their worldviews was a threat to their very sense of self. Their inner dictator rushed in to protect them.Take it from the student with the code name Lawful. He felt he had been damaged emotionally by the study. “Our adversary in the debate subjected us to various insults,” Lawful reflected four decades later. “It was a highly unpleasant experience.”Today, Lawful has a different code name, one that’s familiar to most Americans. He’s known as the Unabomber.The Unabomber was the nickname given to Theodore (Ted) Kaczynski, an American domestic terrorist and former mathematics professor who carried out a nationwide bombing campaign in the United States from 1978 to 1995.📌 Who was the Unabomber?Name: Ted KaczynskiBackground: Brilliant mathematician, attended Harvard at age 16, later became anti-technology and lived in isolation in a remote cabin in Montana.Belief: He believed modern technology and industrial society were destroying human freedom and the environment.💣 What did he do?He sent homemade bombs through the mail to universities, airlines, and individuals involved with technology.His attacks killed 3 people and injured 23 others.The FBI called the case UNABOM (from UNiversity and Airline BOMber), which led to the nickname Unabomber.📄 The ManifestoIn 1995, he demanded that a newspaper publish his manifesto titled “Industrial Society and Its Future”, where he explained his anti-technology views.The Washington Post published it.His brother recognized his writing style and alerted the FBI, which led to Ted's arrest in 1996.⚖️ What happened to him?He was arrested in 1996.He received 8 life sentences without the possibility of parole.He died in prison in 2023.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 48 کتاب Think Again   ✅ Entitled to one’s opinion: Having the right to express your belief,حق داشتن برای بیان نظر خود✅ Hold an opinion: To have or maintain a belief,داشتن یک نظر یا عقیده✅ Express (an opinion): To say or share your thoughts,ابراز کردن نظر✅ Ground (something) in facts: To base something on real evidence,بر پایه واقعیت‌ها بنا کردن✅ Change one’s mind: To decide to do or believe something different,تغییر نظر دادن✅ Better evidence emerges: New and stronger proof becomes available,شواهد بهتری ظاهر می‌شود✅ Worldview: A person’s overall philosophy or way of seeing the world,نگرش کلی به جهان✅ Unethical study: A research project that goes against moral rules,مطالعه یا تحقیق غیراخلاقی✅ Superforecasters: People who are exceptionally good at predicting future events,پیش‌بین‌های فوق‌العاده دقیق✅ Exciting opportunity: A chance to do something interesting and positive,فرصت هیجان‌انگیز✅ Develop and evolve thinking: Improve and grow your ideas over time,توسعه و پیشرفت در تفکر✅ Detach : To separate something from something else,جدا کردن✅ Sense of self: Your understanding of who you are,درک یا شناخت از هویت خود✅ Inner dictator: A controlling internal voice that protects ego or beliefs,دیکتاتور درونی✅ Adversary: Enemy or opponent in an argument or conflict,حریف، دشمن✅ Subject (someone) to insults: To expose someone to rude or offensive comments,در معرض توهین قرار دادن کسی✅ Highly unpleasant experience: A very negative or uncomfortable situation,تجربه‌ای بسیار ناخوشایند✅ Code name: A fake or secret name used instead of the real one,نام رمزی✅ Domestic terrorist: A person who commits violent acts within their own country,تروریست داخلی✅ Carried out a campaign: Performed a series of planned actions,انجام دادن یک کمپین یا عملیات✅ Nationwide: Across the whole country,در سراسر کشور✅ Anti-technology: Against or opposed to modern technology,ضد فناوری✅ Lived in isolation: Chose to live completely alone,به تنهایی زندگی کردن✅ Remote cabin: A small house far from towns or people,کلبه‌ای دورافتاده✅ Homemade bombs: Explosive devices made by hand, not factory-made,بمب‌های دست‌ساز✅ Manifesto: A public written statement of beliefs or aims,مانیفست، بیانیه رسمی✅ Recognized his writing style: Identified someone by how they write,سبک نوشتاری او را تشخیص داد✅ Alerted the FBI: Informed the FBI about something important,به اف‌بی‌آی اطلاع داد✅ Without the possibility of parole: No chance of being released from prison early,بدون امکان عفو یا آزادی مشروط

What forecasters do in tournaments is good practice in life. When you form an opinion, ask yourself what would have to happen to prove it false. Then keep track of your views so you can see when you were right, when you were wrong, and how your thinking has evolved. “I started out just wanting to prove myself,” Jean-Pierre says. “Now I want to improve myself—to see how good I can get.”It’s one thing to admit to ourselves that we’ve been wrong. It’s another thing to confess that to other people. Even if we manage to overthrow our inner dictator, we run the risk of facing outer ridicule.In some cases we fear that if others find out we were wrong, it could destroy our reputations. How do people who accept being wrong cope with that?In the early 1990s, the British physicist Andrew Lyne published a major discovery in the world’s most prestigious science journal. He presented the first evidence that a planet could orbit a neutron star—a star that had exploded into a supernova. Several months later,while preparing to give a presentation at an astronomy conference, he noticed that he hadn’t adjusted for the fact that the Earth moves in an elliptical orbit, not a circular one. He was embarrassingly, horribly wrong. The planet he had discovered didn’t exist.In front of hundreds of colleagues, Andrew walked onto the ballroom stage and admitted his mistake. When he finished his confession, the room exploded in a standing ovation. One astrophysicist called it “the most honorable thing I’ve ever seen.”Andrew Lyne is not alone. Psychologists find that admitting we were wrong doesn’t make us look less competent. It’s a display of honesty and a willingness to learn. Although scientists believe it will damage their reputation to admit that their studies failed toreplicate, the reverse is true: they’re judged more favorably if they acknowledge the new data rather than deny them. After all, it doesn’t matter “whose fault it is that something is broken if it’s your responsibility to fix it,” actor Will Smith has said. “Taking responsibility is taking your power back.”کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   📱 پیج اینستاگرام: Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 47 کتاب Think Again   ✅ Form an opinion: To create or develop a belief or viewpoint.  📘 Build a personal belief.  نظر دادن / شکل دادن به یک باور  ✅ Prove (something) false: Show that something is incorrect.  📘 Disprove an idea.  نادرست بودنِ چیزی را ثابت کردن  ✅ Keep track of: Monitor or follow progress.  📘 Follow closely over time.  پیگیری کردن / دنبال کردن  ✅ Evolve (thinking): Gradually change or develop.  📘 Grow or improve over time.  تکامل پیدا کردن / پیشرفت کردن  ✅ Prove myself: Show others your abilities or worth.  📘 Show I’m capable.  خودم را ثابت کنم  ✅ Improve myself: Work to become better.  📘 Develop or grow personally.  خود را بهتر کردن / پیشرفت شخصی  ✅ Admit to (being wrong): Confess that you made a mistake.  📘 Accept a fault.  اعتراف کردن به اشتباه  ✅ Confess (to others): Tell someone about a mistake or truth.  📘 Openly reveal the truth.  اقرار کردن / صادقانه گفتن  ✅ Overthrow (inner dictator): Defeat internal fear or ego.  📘 Break down your mental blocks or pride.  غلبه بر / سرنگون کردن دیکتاتور درونی  ✅ Run the risk of: Expose yourself to the possibility of something negative.  📘 Take a chance that may go wrong.  خطرِ ... را به جان خریدن  ✅ Ridicule: Mockery or harsh teasing.  📘 Being made fun of.  تمسخر  ✅ Reputation: Public opinion or how others see you.  📘 Social or professional image.  شهرت / اعتبار  ✅ Cope with: Manage a difficult situation.  📘 Deal with stress or problems.  کنار آمدن با / مقابله کردن با  ✅ Admit a mistake: Publicly say you were wrong.  📘 Own up to an error.  قبول کردن اشتباه  ✅ Standing ovation: When the audience stands up and claps.  📘 A big show of respect and admiration.  تشویق ایستاده  ✅ Honorable: Deserving respect and admiration.  📘 Honest and courageous.  قابل احترام / شرافتمندانه  ✅ Display of honesty: Showing openness and truthfulness.  📘 Being real and truthful.  نمایش صداقت  ✅ Willingness to learn: Openness to new knowledge or feedback.  📘 Readiness to grow and change.  تمایل به یادگیری  ✅ Acknowledge (data/fact): Accept or admit something is true.  📘 Recognize the truth.  پذیرفتن / تصدیق کردن  ✅ Deny (data/facts): Refuse to accept something is true.  📘 Reject a fact.  انکار کردن  ✅ Take responsibility: Accept the role in something that went wrong.  📘 Own the problem.  مسئولیت‌پذیر بودن  ✅ Take your power back: Regain control over your situation.  📘 Be empowered again.  قدرت خود را پس گرفتن

As prescient as Jean-Pierre’s bet on Trump was, he still had trouble sticking to it in the face of his feelings. In the spring of 2016, he identified the media coverage of Hillary Clinton’s emails as a red flag, and kept predicting a Trump victory for two months more. By the summer, though, as he contemplated the impending possibility of aTrump presidency, he found himself struggling to sleep at night. He changed his forecast to Clinton.Looking back, Jean-Pierre isn’t defensive about his decision. He freely admits that despite being an experienced forecaster, he made the rookie mistake of falling victim to desirability bias, allowing his preference to cloud his judgment. He focused on the forces that would enable him to predict a Clinton win because he desperately wanted a Trump loss. “That was just a way of me trying to deal with this unpleasant forecast I had issued,” he says. Then he does something unexpected: he laughs at himself.If we’re insecure, we make fun of others. If we’re comfortable being wrong, we’re not afraid to poke fun at ourselves. Laughing at ourselves reminds us that although we might take our decisions seriously, we don’t have to take ourselves too seriously. Researchsuggests that the more frequently we make fun of ourselves, the happier we tend to be.* Instead of beating ourselves up about our mistakes, we can turn some of our past misconceptions into sources of present amusement.Being wrong won’t always be joyful. The path to embracing mistakes is full of painful moments, and we handle those moments better when we remember they’re essential for progress. But if we can’t learn to find occasional glee in discovering we were wrong, it will be awfully hard to get anything right.I’ve noticed a paradox in great scientists and superforecasters: the reason they’re so comfortable being wrong is that they’re terrified of being wrong. What sets them apart is the time horizon. They’redetermined to reach the correct answer in the long run, and they know that means they have to be open to stumbling, backtracking, and rerouting in the short run. They shun rose-colored glasses in favor of a sturdy mirror. The fear of missing the mark next year is apowerful motivator to get a crystal-clear view of last year’s mistakes. “People who are right a lot listen a lot, and they change their mind a lot,” Jeff Bezos says. “If you don’t change your mind frequently, you’re going to be wrong a lot.”Jean-Pierre Beugoms has a favorite trick for catching himself when he’s wrong. When he makes a forecast, he also makes a list of the conditions in which it should hold true—as well as the conditions under which he would change his mind. He explains that this keeps him honest, preventing him from getting attached to a badprediction.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   پیج اینستاگرام:      Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 46 کتاب Think Again✅ Prescient: Having foresight or ability to predict future events, دارای بینش آینده‌نگر✅ Bet on: To gamble or take a risk on something happening, شرط بستن روی✅ Stick to (something): To continue with a plan or decision, پایبند بودن به✅ In the face of: Despite, با وجود✅ Media coverage: How news and media report an event, پوشش خبری✅ Red flag: A warning sign or indication of a problem, علامت هشدار✅ Victory: Winning, پیروزی✅ Contemplate: To think about deeply, اندیشیدن به✅ Impending: About to happen, قریب‌الوقوع✅ Forecast: A prediction or estimate of a future event, پیش‌بینی✅ Defensive: Trying to justify oneself or protect from criticism, دفاعی✅ Admit: To accept or confess, قبول کردن✅ Rookie mistake: A beginner’s error, اشتباه تازه‌کارانه✅ Desirability bias: The tendency to want a certain outcome, سوگیری تمایل به نتیجه دلخواه✅ Cloud (one’s) judgment: To affect one’s ability to think clearly, تحت تأثیر قرار دادن قضاوت✅ Desperately: With great urgency or need, به شدت✅ Unpleasant: Not enjoyable or agreeable, ناخوشایند✅ Laugh at oneself: To be able to see one’s own faults humorously, خود را دست انداختن✅ Insecure: Lacking confidence, ناامن✅ Make fun of: To tease or joke about, مسخره کردن✅ Poke fun at: To tease lightly, طعنه زدن✅ Take (something) seriously: To regard with importance, جدی گرفتن✅ Beat oneself up: To blame or criticize oneself harshly, خود را سرزنش کردن✅ Misconception: A wrong idea or understanding, تصور اشتباه✅ Amusement: Enjoyment or fun, سرگرمی✅ Embrace mistakes: To accept errors as part of learning, پذیرفتن اشتباهات✅ Painful moments: Difficult or unpleasant times, لحظات دردناک✅ Progress: Forward movement or improvement, پیشرفت✅ Glee: Joy or delight, خوشحالی✅ Paradox: A situation that seems contradictory but is true, تناقض✅ Time horizon: The period over which a goal or prediction is considered, افق زمانی✅ Stumble: To make a mistake or falter, لغزش کردن✅ Backtracking: Retracing steps or changing a decision, عقب‌نشینی✅ Rerouting: Changing direction or plan, تغییر مسیر✅ Shun: To avoid deliberately, اجتناب کردن✅ Rose-colored glasses: An overly optimistic view, دیدگاه خوش‌بینانه✅ Motivator: Something that encourages action, انگیزه‌بخش✅ Crystal-clear: Very clear and easy to understand, کاملاً واضح✅ Attached to (something): Emotionally connected or committed, وابسته بودن✅ Hold true: To remain valid or accurate, درست بودن✅ Change one’s mind: To alter one’s opinion, نظر خود را عوض کردن✅ Keep honest: To remain truthful and objective, صادق ماندن

اطلاعات بیشتر در مورد چالش های مکالمهآیدی تلگرام Ad_lumiWhen Donald Trump first declared his candidacy in the spring of 2015, Jean-Pierre gave him only a 2 percent chance of becoming the nominee. As Trump began rising in the August polls, Jean-Pierre was motivated to question himself. He detached his present from hispast, acknowledging that his original prediction was understandable, given the information he had at the time.Detaching his opinions from his identity was harder. Jean-Pierre didn’t want Trump to win, so it would’ve been easy to fall into the trap of desirability bias. He overcame it by focusing on a different goal. “I wasn’t so attached to my original forecast,” he explained, because of “the desire to win, the desire to be the best forecaster.” He still had a stake in the outcome he actually preferred, but he had an even bigger stake in not making a mistake. His values put truth above tribe: “If the evidence strongly suggests that my tribe is wrong on a particular issue, then so be it. I consider all of my opinions tentative. When the facts change, I change my opinions.”Research suggests that identifying even a single reason why we might be wrong can be enough to curb overconfidence. Jean-Pierre went further; he made a list of all the arguments that pundits were making about why Trump couldn’t win and went looking for evidence that they (and he) were wrong. He found that evidence within the polls: in contrast with widespread claims that Trump was a factional candidate with narrow appeal, Jean-Pierre saw that Trump was popular across key Republican demographic groups. By mid-September, Jean-Pierre was an outlier, putting Trump’s odds of becoming the nominee over 50 percent. “Accept the fact that you’re going to be wrong,” Jean-Pierre advises. “Try to disprove yourself.When you’re wrong, it’s not something to be depressed about. Say, ‘Hey, I discovered something."کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   پیج اینستاگرام:      Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 45 کتاب Think Again✅ Declare candidacy: Officially announce you're running for a position, اعلام نامزدی کردن✅ Polls: Surveys that measure public opinion, especially during elections, نظرسنجی‌ها✅ Question oneself: To reflect and doubt your own beliefs or actions, زیر سؤال بردن خود✅ Detach from the past: To separate your current thinking from old experiences or beliefs, جدا شدن از گذشته✅ Desirability bias: Letting what you want to be true influence what you think is true, سوگیری مطلوبیت✅ Fall into the trap of: Be easily tricked or caught by a common mistake, در دامِ ... افتادن✅ Have a stake in: Have a personal interest or something to gain or lose, منافع داشتن در✅ Not making a mistake: Avoiding errors or wrong judgments, اشتباه نکردن✅ Truth above tribe: Valuing facts over group loyalty, راستگویی بالاتر از تعصب گروهی✅ So be it: Accepting something, even if it’s not preferred, باشد، اشکالی ندارد✅ Tentative opinion: An opinion that is not fixed or final, نظر موقتی یا غیرقطعی✅ Curb overconfidence: Control or reduce the feeling of being overly sure, مهار اعتماد به نفس بیش از حد✅ Go further: Take things a step beyond what's expected, فراتر رفتن✅ Pundit: An expert who shares opinions publicly (often political), کارشناس رسانه‌ای✅ Look for evidence: Search for facts or proof, به دنبال شواهد بودن✅ Factional candidate: A candidate who only appeals to a small group, نامزد جناحی یا گروهی✅ Narrow appeal: Attractive to only a limited group of people, جذابیت محدود✅ Outlier: A person or result that is very different from others, مورد استثنایی، متفاوت از بقیه✅ Disprove yourself: Try to prove that your own belief is wrong, رد کردن فرضیه یا باور خود✅ Accept the fact: Recognize something as true, even if you don’t like it, پذیرفتن واقعیت✅ Be depressed about: Feel sad or down about something, افسرده شدن بابت چیزی✅ Discover something: Realize or learn something new, often unexpectedly, کشف کردن چیزی

Another of the world’s top forecasters is Kjirste Morrell. She’s obviously bright—she has a doctorate from MIT in mechanical engineering—but her academic and professional experience wasn’texactly relevant to predicting world events. Her background was in human hip joint mechanics, designing better shoes, and building robotic wheelchairs. When I asked Kjirste what made her so good atforecasting, she replied, “There’s no benefit to me for being wrong for longer. It’s much better if I change my beliefs sooner, and it’s a good feeling to have that sense of a discovery, that surprise—I would think people would enjoy that.” Kjirste hasn’t just figured out how to erase the pain of being wrong. She’s transformed it into a source of pleasure. She landed there through a form of classical conditioning, like when Pavlov’s dog learned to salivate at the sound of a bell. If being wrong repeatedly leads us to the right answer, the experience of being wrong itself can become joyful. That doesn’t mean we’ll enjoy it every step of the way. One of Kjirste’s biggest misses was her forecast for the 2016 U.S.presidential election, where she bet on Hillary Clinton to beat Donald Trump. Since she wasn’t a Trump supporter, the prospect of being wrong was painful—it was too central to her identity. She knew a Trump presidency was possible, but she didn’t want to think it wasprobable, so she couldn’t bring herself to forecast it.That was a common mistake in 2016. Countless experts,pollsters, and pundits underestimated Trump—and Brexit—because they were too emotionally invested in their past predictions and identities. If you want to be a better forecaster today, it helps to let go of your commitment to the opinions you held yesterday. Just wake up in the morning, snap your fingers, and decide you don’t care. It doesn’t matter who’s president or what happens to your country. The world is unjust and the expertise you spent decades developing is obsolete! It’s a piece of cake, right? About as easy as willing yourself to fall out of love. Somehow, Jean-Pierre Beugoms managed to pull it off.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   پیج اینستاگرام:      Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 44 کتاب Think Again✅ Top forecaster: A highly skilled person in making accurate predictions – پیش‌بینی‌کننده‌ی برتر✅ Academic background: Someone’s education and research history – پیشینه‌ی علمی✅ Professional experience: Work-related knowledge and skills gained over time – تجربه‌ی حرفه‌ای✅ Not exactly relevant to: Not directly connected or related to – ارتباط مستقیمی نداشت با...✅ There’s no benefit to me for being wrong for longer: Staying wrong doesn’t help; it’s better to correct yourself sooner – اشتباه ماندن طولانی‌مدت هیچ فایده‌ای ندارد✅ Change one’s beliefs: Adjust your opinions based on new evidence – تغییر دادن باورها✅ Sense of a discovery: The feeling that you’ve found or realized something new – حس کشف کردن چیزی جدید✅ Source of pleasure: Something that causes happiness – منبع لذت✅ Classical conditioning: A learned response triggered by repetition, like in Pavlov’s dog experiment – شرطی‌سازی کلاسیک✅ Salivate at the sound of a bell: Respond automatically to a learned trigger – آب دهان راه افتادن با شنیدن زنگ (نمونه‌ای از شرطی‌سازی)✅ joyful: something that is joyful causes happiness and pleasure. – لذت بخش✅ Every step of the way: Throughout the entire process – در تمام مراحل✅ One of the biggest misses: A major error in prediction – یکی از بزرگ‌ترین خطاهای پیش‌بینی✅ Emotionally invested in: Deeply emotionally attached or involved – از نظر احساسی درگیر بودن✅ Bring oneself to do something: Force or persuade yourself to do something difficult – خود را راضی کردن به انجام کاری سخت✅ Pundits and pollsters: Experts and people who conduct opinion polls – کارشناسان و نظرسنج‌ها✅ Let go of your commitment to your opinions: Stop holding tightly to your previous beliefs – رها کردن تعهد به باورهای قبلی✅ Snap your fingers: Instantly or easily (often said sarcastically) – به راحتی / با یک بشکن انگشت✅ A piece of cake: Very easy (often used sarcastically in this context) – کاری خیلی ساده (کنایه‌آمیز)✅ Will yourself to do something: Mentally force yourself to do something difficult – با اراده‌ی شخصی کاری را انجام دادن✅ Fall out of love: Stop loving or being emotionally attached – بی‌علاقه شدن / از عشق درآمدن

Even if forecasting isn’t your hobby, there’s a lot to be learned from studying how forecasters like Jean-Pierre form their opinions. My colleague Phil Tetlock finds that forecasting skill is less a matter of what we know than of how we think. When he and his collaborators studied a host of factors that predict excellence in forecasting, grit and ambition didn’t rise to the top. Neither did intelligence, which came in second. There was another factor that had roughly triple the predictive power of brainpower.The single most important driver of forecasters’ success was how often they updated their beliefs. The best forecasters went throughmore rethinking cycles. They had the confident humility to doubt their judgments and the curiosity to discover new information that led them to revise their predictions.A key question here is how much rethinking is necessary.Although the sweet spot will always vary from one person and situation to the next, the averages can give us a clue. A few years into their tournaments, typical competitors updated their predictions about twice per question. The superforecasters updated their predictions more than four times per question.Think about how manageable that is. Better judgment doesn’t necessarily require hundreds or even dozens of updates. Just a few more efforts at rethinking can move the needle. It’s also worth noting, though, how unusual that level of rethinking is. How many ofus can even remember the last time we admitted being wrong and revised our opinions accordingly? As journalist Kathryn Schulz observes, “Although small amounts of evidence are sufficient to make us draw conclusions, they are seldom sufficient to make us revise them.”That’s where the best forecasters excelled: they were eager to think again. They saw their opinions more as hunches than as truths —as possibilities to entertain rather than facts to embrace. They questioned ideas before accepting them, and they were willing to keep questioning them even after accepting them. They were constantly seeking new information and better evidence—especially disconfirming evidence.On Seinfeld, George Costanza famously said, “It’s not a lie if you believe it.” I might add that it doesn’t become the truth just because you believe it. It’s a sign of wisdom to avoid believing every thought that enters your mind. It’s a mark of emotional intelligence to avoid internalizing every feeling that enters your heart.کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   پیج اینستاگرام:      Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 43 کتاب Think Again✅ Forecasting: Predicting the future, especially in data or weather, پیش‌بینی✅ Form an opinion: To develop a belief or judgment, شکل دادن یک نظر✅ A host of factors: Many different causes or elements, مجموعه‌ای از عوامل✅ Come in second: To be ranked second in importance or performance, در رتبه دوم قرار گرفتن✅ Triple the predictive power: Three times more ability to predict, سه برابر توان پیش‌بینی✅ Driver of success: Main cause or motivator for achievement, عامل اصلی موفقیت✅ Update beliefs: Change beliefs based on new information, به‌روزرسانی باورها✅ Rethinking cycles: Repeated process of reconsidering ideas, چرخه‌های بازاندیشی✅ Confident humility: Being self-assured but open to being wrong, تواضع همراه با اعتمادبه‌نفس✅ Revise predictions: Change or improve forecasts, اصلاح پیش‌بینی‌ها✅ Sweet spot: The ideal amount or balance, نقطه‌ی مطلوب / تعادل مناسب✅ Move the needle: Make a noticeable impact or change, ایجاد تغییر محسوس✅ Admit being wrong: Accept that you were incorrect, پذیرفتن اشتباه✅ Draw conclusions: Make judgments based on evidence, نتیجه‌گیری کردن✅ Revise opinions: Reconsider and change your views, اصلاح دیدگاه‌ها✅ Think again: Reevaluate or reconsider, دوباره فکر کردن / بازاندیشی✅ Entertain a possibility: Consider something as potentially true, در نظر گرفتن یک احتمال✅ Facts to embrace: Facts to accept and support fully, واقعیت‌هایی برای پذیرفتن✅ Disconfirming evidence: Proof that goes against what you believe, شواهد خلاف یا ردکننده✅ It’s not a lie if you believe it: (Ironically) Belief doesn’t make something true, دروغ نیست اگر خودت باورش داشته باشی✅ Avoid internalizing: Don’t absorb every emotion deeply, درونی نکردن احساسات✅ Mark of emotional intelligence: A sign of being emotionally smart, نشانه هوش هیجانی✅ Hunch: A gut feeling or instinct, حدس / حس درونی

On November 18, 2015, Jean-Pierre registered a prediction that stunned his opponents. A day earlier, a new question had popped up in an open forecasting tournament: in July 2016, who would win the U.S. Republican presidential primary? The options were Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Marco Rubio, Donald Trump, and none of the above. With eight months to go before the Republican National Convention, Trump was largely seen as a joke.His odds of becoming the Republican nominee were only 6 percent according to Nate Silver, the celebrated statistician behind the website FiveThirtyEight. When Jean-Pierre peered into his crystal ball, though, he decided Trump had a 68 percent chance of winning.Jean-Pierre didn’t just excel in predicting the results of American events. His Brexit forecasts hovered in the 50 percent range when most of his competitors thought the referendum had little chance of passing. He successfully predicted that the incumbent would lose a presidential election in Senegal, even though the base rates ofreelection were extremely high and other forecasters were expectinga decisive win. And he had, in fact, pegged Trump as the favorite long before pundits and pollsters even considered him a viable contender.“It’s striking,” Jean-Pierre wrote early on, back in 2015, that so many forecasters are “still in denial about his chances.”Based on his performance, Jean-Pierre might be the world’s best election forecaster. His advantage: he thinks like a scientist. He’s passionately dispassionate. At various points in his life, Jean-Pierrehas changed his political ideologies and religious beliefs.* He doesn’t come from a polling or statistics background; he’s a military historian, which means he has no stake in the way things have alwaysbeen done in forecasting. The statisticians were attached to their views about how to aggregate polls. Jean-Pierre paid more attention to factors that were hard to measure and overlooked. For Trump, those included “Mastery at manipulating the media; Name recognition; and A winning issue (i.e., immigration and ‘the wall’).”کانال خلاصه کتاب (https://t.me/luminous_bookclub) کانال موزیک (https://t.me/luminous_music)  کانال مکالمات روزمره (https://t.me/foroughpapi)   پیج اینستاگرام:      Luminous__englishCastbox channel: luminous english📚هایلایت قسمت 42 کتاب Think Again✅ Forecast / Predict: (To say what will happen in the future based on information or analysis) پیش‌بینی کردن✅ Opponent: (Someone who competes against or opposes another) رقیب، مخالف✅ Pop up: (To appear suddenly or unexpectedly) ناگهان ظاهر شدن✅ Odds: (The probability or chance of something happening) احتمال، شانس✅ Crystal ball: (A metaphor for predicting the future) کره شیشه‌ای (به معنای پیش‌بینی آینده)✅ Excel in: (To be very good at something) در کاری بسیار خوب بودن✅ Hover around: (To stay close to a particular number or level) در حدود چیزی بودن✅ Referendum: (A public vote on a specific political question) همه‌پرسی✅ Incumbent: (The current holder of a political office) صاحب‌منصب فعلی✅ Base rate: (The normal or average rate of occurrence) نرخ پایه، نرخ معمول✅ Decisive win: (A clear and definite victory) پیروزی قاطع✅ Pegged as: (To identify or consider someone as something) شناخته شدن به عنوان✅ Pundit: (An expert or commentator, especially in politics) کارشناس سیاسی/رسانه‌ای✅ Pollster: (A person who conducts opinion polls) نظرسنج✅ Viable contender: (A serious and realistic competitor) رقیب قابل قبول، جدی✅ In denial: (Refusing to accept the truth) انکار واقعیت✅ Dispassionate: (Not influenced by strong emotions, impartial) بی‌طرف، خونسرد✅ Stake: (A personal interest or involvement in something) منفعت، سهم✅ Aggregate polls: (To combine the results of several opinion polls) تجمیع نتایج نظرسنجی‌ها✅ Manipulate the media: (To influence or control the media in a skillful way) کنترل یا تحت تأثیر قرار دادن رسانه‌ها