intellectual-modern
Skill0 starsChanged 46 days agoMITView on GitHub
当用户想用理工科思维理解复杂世界时调用:评估一位专家或一个说法是否可信、判断要不要继续投入、设计改变行为的机制、识读教育与社会的运转逻辑、做信息查证与信念更新、或在 AI 时代定位自己的不可替代性。覆盖《智识分子》(万维钢)的全部方法论:狐狸与刺猬、多方法库、常识祛魅、边际分析、激励与价格信号、复杂系统勿扰动、权力三围、教育分类与流水线教育、品格教育、大数据预测、可预测性判定、信息极客三功夫、贝叶斯更新、人机分工、去中心化组织等 39 项能力。不适用于:专业法律/医疗/金融建议与需要正式统计建模的定量分析;也不用于为说服目的包装话术(it is about thinking methods, not professional advice or rhetoric)。
In this repository24 other files it gives its agents.
- automate-boring-stuffSkill
- a-year-rebirthSkill
- cognitive-driveSkill
- computationSkill
- counseling-for-toadsSkill
- courage-to-be-dislikedSkill
- deliberate-practiceSkill
- elite-time-controlSkill
- goodbye-sapiensSkill
- how-to-read-a-bookSkill
- let-time-make-you-richSkill
- myth-of-sisyphusSkill
- naval-almanackSkill
- nonviolent-communicationSkill
- one-thing-in-lifeSkill
- poor-charlies-almanackSkill
- python-crash-courseSkill
- python-quick-referenceSkill
- settle-yourselfSkill
- seven-habitsSkill
- siddharthaSkill
- social-psychologySkill
- thinking-fast-and-slowSkill
- underlying-logicSkill
The file
Files
《智识分子:做个复杂的现代人》 — 全书能力入口
触发与不触发
适用:与本书能力域相关的咨询与任务(见下方路由表的意图列)。 不适用:
- 专业领域(法律、医疗、金融、统计建模)的正式咨询与决策——本包提供思维方法,不替代专业建议。
- 需要实时事实核查或最新数据的新闻判断——本包提供方法框架,不提供实时数据。
- 对具体个人/群体的道德评判与政治站队——本书是分析方法,不是立场纲领。
核心原则(常驻速览,概览类问题读到这里即可回答)
- 常识是我们的敌人:主流看法默认先怀疑,用数据与检验修正——把未来当概率分布,而不是常识判断。
- 任何判断先问代价与边际:「没有免费的午餐」;用「下一步值不值」的边际分析替代总量思维与感情投入。
- 人会对激励做出反应,也会互相模仿:改变行为看激励结构与模仿渠道,而不是喊口号、讲道理。
- 复杂系统(complex)不能凭空扰动:牵一发而动全身;简单系统(complicated)才可预测、可动手改。
- 专家的可信度看思维方式不看头衔:狐狸(多视角、常修正)远优于刺猬(一个大主意)。
- 教育的默认功能是分类与打磨器具:主人教育(审美、明辨、调动资源)几乎只能靠家庭与个人。
- 英雄=不被大数据预测的人:机器的疆域是可预测,人的位置在创造新知识与表达好恶。
能力路由(先读本表,按意图加载 1 张能力卡)
| 用户意图 | 先读 | 补读/备注 |
| 评估某位专家或某个说法的可信度,决定该不该信;有人拿头衔、机构、从业年限为某个判断背书,想核对这个背书管不管用;发现自己长期用一个框架解释一切问题,想自查是否被「大主意」劫持;为有争议的公共问题选立场时,手里只有单一领域专家的意见 | references/capabilities/fox-vs-hedgehog.md | references/capabilities/multi-method-toolkit.md、references/capabilities/common-sense-skeptic.md、references/capabilities/big-data-prediction.md、references/capabilities/bayesian-update.md |
| 一个复杂问题用单一理论或单一学科视角解释不通,想换视角看;讨论里出现「越X越Y」式的单向论证,想把它拉回「度」与代价上;想知道该学哪些通识、哪些方法才够用(博雅教育的标准);面对只有一套理念的人替公共问题定案,想看看别的流派会怎么说 | references/capabilities/multi-method-toolkit.md | references/capabilities/fox-vs-hedgehog.md、references/capabilities/marginal-stop-rule.md、references/capabilities/dont-poke-complex-systems.md、references/capabilities/knowledge-reliability.md |
| 听到一个人人皆知的说法,想核对它到底成不成立;打算把事后总结与复盘结论用来预测或制订计划,想先检验一遍;两种常识都讲得通、不知道信哪一边,需要一个裁决标准;需要把预测写成概率分布式的判断,而不是一个单点结论 | references/capabilities/common-sense-skeptic.md | references/capabilities/fox-vs-hedgehog.md、references/capabilities/big-data-prediction.md、references/capabilities/predictability-test.md、references/capabilities/information-sleuth.md、references/capabilities/bayesian-update.md |
| 出现模仿型苗头,要决定现在管不管、管哪里;做报道或内容发布时,纠结详尽曝光会不会放大模仿;营销预算分配:请少数名人还是批量投放一般影响力者;看到一连串同类事件,想判断是不是某个「总原因」造成的 | references/capabilities/social-contagion.md | references/capabilities/incentive-design.md、references/capabilities/dont-poke-complex-systems.md |
| 讨论税收、福利、补贴、慈善等公共议题,论据是「都是一家人」;要不要把一次性的帮扶/福利做成长期化、规模化的制度;做慈善、捐款、公益活动前,想弄清自己的动机与后果;解释为什么政策总向「闹得凶、声音大」的群体倾斜;小地方办事要托关系,想看清人情与契约两套规则的效率差别 | references/capabilities/strangers-not-family.md | references/capabilities/incentive-design.md、references/capabilities/price-signal-check.md、references/capabilities/voter-story-thinking.md、references/capabilities/three-ring-power.md、references/capabilities/age-of-abundance.md |
| 一个项目/习惯/投入做了很久,纠结还要不要继续;有人用「已经投了这么多」「历史回报很高」劝继续加码;把「不惜一切代价」「一个都不能少」翻译成可执行的取舍;给一项持续投入定停止点、预算上限或退出规则 | references/capabilities/marginal-stop-rule.md | references/capabilities/multi-method-toolkit.md、references/capabilities/price-signal-check.md、references/capabilities/dont-poke-complex-systems.md、references/capabilities/space-and-big-science.md |
| 想让孩子/学生养成习惯(写作业、作息、屏幕时间),讲道理不管用;设计奖励/积分/配额机制,担心「奖了反而更糟」;惩罚或激励上线后,不良行为反而上升;想给长期靠人情/道德维持的行为引入金钱定价 | references/capabilities/incentive-design.md | references/capabilities/social-contagion.md、references/capabilities/strangers-not-family.md、references/capabilities/economic-discrimination.md、references/capabilities/kipp-character-education.md |
| 评估某领域该不该市场化、引入竞争(教育、医疗、科研、体育);检查「私有化就能解决」「放开收费就行」式改革方案;某领域顶端红火,但上游供给反而萎缩,想找原因;判断某类服务里「贵」到底代不代表「好」 | references/capabilities/price-signal-check.md | references/capabilities/strangers-not-family.md、references/capabilities/marginal-stop-rule.md、references/capabilities/education-sorting-machine.md |
| 评估一项拟推行的改革、政策或制度改版该不该动手;判断某个对象是 complicated 还是 complex(牵一发而动全身吗);解释某个大动作改革为什么出意外后果、或者干脆没效果;为「无先例的大招」寻找可逆的小步方案与复查条件 | references/capabilities/dont-poke-complex-systems.md | references/capabilities/multi-method-toolkit.md、references/capabilities/social-contagion.md、references/capabilities/marginal-stop-rule.md、references/capabilities/predictability-test.md、references/capabilities/scale-and-hard-conditions.md |
| 为什么讲道理、摆数据没人听,沟通失败该怎么解释;设计面向公众的说明或传播方案(该讲什么、不该讲什么);分析一场公共争论背后的叙事,判断大家在为哪个故事站队;解释民主/公共决策为什么失灵(而不是归因于选民愚蠢或自私) | references/capabilities/voter-story-thinking.md | references/capabilities/strangers-not-family.md、references/capabilities/moral-modules.md、references/capabilities/three-ring-power.md |
| 「好人没好报」,世界观受冲击、觉得坚持没有意义;复盘重大选择:我的理由是出于自身原则,还是对外界刺激的反应;要不要为一个没有好处的事坚持/付出代价(拒绝跟着一起贪、不走捷径);自查有没有用公平世界假设思考(拒绝学某人经验、以成败论人品) | references/capabilities/fair-world-hypothesis.md | references/capabilities/economic-discrimination.md、references/capabilities/road-to-character.md、references/capabilities/moral-modules.md |
| 怀疑自己被区别对待,想判断这算不算歧视、是哪种歧视;遇到歧视后该做什么:抱怨、投诉还是发信号改变对方的判断;自查自己的判断里有没有统计歧视(用群体印象替代了解个人);回顾反复「吃亏」的交易,找出可改变的信息结构 | references/capabilities/economic-discrimination.md | references/capabilities/incentive-design.md、references/capabilities/fair-world-hypothesis.md、references/capabilities/big-data-prediction.md |
| 家庭群/同事群为道德或政治话题吵起来,想弄清双方到底在争什么;想不通「为什么讲道理、摆事实,对方就是听不进去」;对自己的强烈道德反应(恶心/义愤)做自测,弄清哪个模块被触发;要面对立场不同的受众发言,需要判断对方的敏感点并设计不靠说服的回应 | references/capabilities/moral-modules.md | references/capabilities/voter-story-thinking.md、references/capabilities/debate-defense.md、references/capabilities/evolutionary-psychology.md、references/capabilities/fair-world-hypothesis.md |
| 分析公司/机构里的人事变动与派系格局:到底谁说了算;复盘一位领导者的动作与结局(为什么他这么做、为什么下台或留任);判断一个国家或组织是不是真民主(不论有没有选举);解释「好领导干不长、腐败者长期在位」「援助越帮越独裁」等现象 | references/capabilities/three-ring-power.md | references/capabilities/strangers-not-family.md、references/capabilities/voter-story-thinking.md、references/capabilities/starfish-vs-spider.md |
| 给孩子择校/报班做「加码还是止损」的判断;识读一所学校或一门考试的真实功能(学历和门槛在干什么);检验「教育决定国运/收入」式论断的因果方向;判断一场竞争是产出型还是互相抵消的抬价型 | references/capabilities/education-sorting-machine.md | references/capabilities/price-signal-check.md、references/capabilities/elite-school-premium.md、references/capabilities/assembly-line-education.md |
| 孩子同时被名校和普通大学录取、差价几十万,判断到底值不值;评估「照名校素质清单再补项目」这个动作对不对;理解名校录取机制、素质教育与捐款通道的真相;被名牌学校拒绝后,判断是不是歧视、该怎么理解 | references/capabilities/elite-school-premium.md | references/capabilities/education-sorting-machine.md、references/capabilities/kipp-character-education.md、references/capabilities/assembly-line-education.md |
| 为「行为与习惯亏空」的孩子/学生设计奖励与纪律制度;判断 KIPP 式高强度管理哪些机制能搬、哪些不能搬;想用「先干好再获得」的挣得式规则替代按成绩发奖;给教育/公益项目定一条清晰、单一的验收标准 | references/capabilities/kipp-character-education.md | references/capabilities/incentive-design.md、references/capabilities/elite-school-premium.md、references/capabilities/road-to-character.md、references/capabilities/assembly-line-education.md、references/capabilities/english-crash-course.md |
| 掂量要不要认真走一条品格路线(自测普通人 vs 办大事);复盘重大选择:在为「简历」还是「悼词」做决定;用「世界需要什么」代替「我想干什么」重述事业方向;在领导位置上校准中庸与冲动控制 | references/capabilities/road-to-character.md | references/capabilities/fair-world-hypothesis.md、references/capabilities/kipp-character-education.md、references/capabilities/assembly-line-education.md、references/capabilities/hero-and-mission.md |
| 识读一所学校或一段教育叙事实际在教什么、培养什么人;给家庭/学校的教育投入逐笔归层(工具、工艺品、主人翁);判断「素质教育」「做最好的自己」是否只是更精致的器具生产;区分「对抗体制」与「加码适应体制」 | references/capabilities/assembly-line-education.md | references/capabilities/education-sorting-machine.md、references/capabilities/elite-school-premium.md、references/capabilities/kipp-character-education.md、references/capabilities/road-to-character.md |
| 自测自己是否正在变成可预测、可替代的人;判断「数据显示你这种人……」式结论对个人是否成立;读懂算法画像、招聘心理测试、测评报告到底在说什么;用「不可预测=英雄候选」的判据做人生或职业复盘 | references/capabilities/big-data-prediction.md | references/capabilities/fox-vs-hedgehog.md、references/capabilities/common-sense-skeptic.md、references/capabilities/economic-discrimination.md、references/capabilities/hero-and-mission.md、references/capabilities/predictability-test.md、references/capabilities/personal-data-defense.md |
| 做长期选择时区分「图好处」与「非做不可」;写使命宣言:只回答「世界需要我干什么」;长期项目反复失败,判断该再试一次还是改变自己;自检是否在用外在动力驱动一件要干很多年的事 | references/capabilities/hero-and-mission.md | references/capabilities/road-to-character.md、references/capabilities/big-data-prediction.md、references/capabilities/innovation-as-surprise.md |
| 复盘自己到底有没有做出计划外的贡献;判断团队用 KPI 与命令推动「创新」的做法有没有问题;决定要不要做用户调研、听不听客户意见;给自己的业务或职业路线在三境界中定位 | references/capabilities/innovation-as-surprise.md | references/capabilities/hero-and-mission.md、references/capabilities/human-machine-division.md、references/capabilities/let-it-die.md、references/capabilities/age-of-abundance.md |
| 判断一份数据预测或趋势报告靠不靠得住;决定在某个领域该诉诸俗套还是防黑天鹅;解释「一直好使的方法突然不灵了」;检查风险模型有没有把连锁反应算进去 | references/capabilities/predictability-test.md | references/capabilities/common-sense-skeptic.md、references/capabilities/dont-poke-complex-systems.md、references/capabilities/big-data-prediction.md、references/capabilities/scale-and-hard-conditions.md |
| 分析十年以上的宏观趋势、大国兴衰与长期约束;判断某项长期约束(地理、人口、资源)是限制还是机遇;识别并反驳用小尺度故事(人物恩怨、近期事件)解释大尺度问题的论证 | references/capabilities/scale-and-hard-conditions.md | references/capabilities/dont-poke-complex-systems.md、references/capabilities/technology-tide.md、references/capabilities/predictability-test.md |
| 评估一项新技术(AI、互联网、新武器)对格局与安全的长期影响;检验「技术进步必然带来和平/更多选择」或「回归原始更好」式论断;为技术突破准备可当日启动的应对预案 | references/capabilities/technology-tide.md | references/capabilities/scale-and-hard-conditions.md、references/capabilities/ai-and-jobs.md、references/capabilities/space-and-big-science.md |
| 有明确期限的英语突破(考试、读专业文献、出国);背单词多年没有质变,想换一套短平快的方法;考完试英语荒废,想重新打通真实阅读 | references/capabilities/english-crash-course.md | references/capabilities/kipp-character-education.md |
| 看到惊人数据或结论,转发、引用前想先核实;公共辩论中想找到比「我认识一个人/古人说」更硬的论据;想用数据回答生活问题,或做量化自我的自我观察 | references/capabilities/information-sleuth.md | references/capabilities/common-sense-skeptic.md、references/capabilities/debate-defense.md、references/capabilities/knowledge-reliability.md |
| 识别对方在用「你能力不行/比境界/某某伟人也曾如此」式人身攻击话术;被人抬杠或先捧后摔时,决定要不要接战、以及怎么防守;复盘一场赢了场面却没解决任何问题的争论 | references/capabilities/debate-defense.md | references/capabilities/moral-modules.md、references/capabilities/information-sleuth.md |
| 用先验→似然→后验→迭代的流程更新一个日常信念(偏方/祈福/某专家/某产品);判断「准确率 99%」之类的证据到底该让我改变多少看法;检查自己的信念是不是只升不降、反证来了也总能解释过去 | references/capabilities/bayesian-update.md | references/capabilities/fox-vs-hedgehog.md、references/capabilities/common-sense-skeptic.md |
| 解释一个人人都这样、却没人说得清为什么的现象(口味偏好、追剧代入、择偶偏好);核对一条「从进化心理学看,这是因为……」的结论该怎么用、信几分;检查某个史前解释是否自洽:有没有繁殖收益、有没有替代解释 | references/capabilities/evolutionary-psychology.md | references/capabilities/moral-modules.md、references/capabilities/knowledge-reliability.md |
| 面对跨领域争议说法,判断该给哪一方多少信任;判断一条专家建议或「科学结论」大概能用多久、该不该一用到底;识别「我发现了推翻整个学科的理论」式宣称,以及自己是否只用谈论代替理解 | references/capabilities/knowledge-reliability.md | references/capabilities/multi-method-toolkit.md、references/capabilities/information-sleuth.md、references/capabilities/evolutionary-psychology.md |
| 评估大型公共项目是否值得持续投入;检验『带动技术进步』式的项目辩护;解释某个宏大目标为何多年停滞 | references/capabilities/space-and-big-science.md | references/capabilities/marginal-stop-rule.md、references/capabilities/technology-tide.md |
| 怀疑同一商品被差别定价(大数据杀熟);盘点商家掌握了自己哪些数据、用来干什么;设计一次小规模分组(A/B)试验 | references/capabilities/personal-data-defense.md | references/capabilities/big-data-prediction.md、references/capabilities/human-machine-division.md |
| 焦虑 AI 替代、想知道自己所在岗位的位置;规划学习与转型方向:学什么、要不要转行;识破『学点艺术/上大学』式的简单答案 | references/capabilities/ai-and-jobs.md | references/capabilities/technology-tide.md、references/capabilities/human-machine-division.md |
| 给一件工作做『交管清单/人的禁脔』分工;回应『AI 都会了,人还剩什么』的焦虑;决定怎么与 AI 工具协作(而不是对抗) | references/capabilities/human-machine-division.md | references/capabilities/innovation-as-surprise.md、references/capabilities/personal-data-defense.md、references/capabilities/ai-and-jobs.md |
| 判断一个打不垮的组织为何打不垮、该换什么打法;评估自己的组织或项目要不要去中心化;理解无领导组织(开源社群/网络平台/恐怖组织)的运作与弱点;给组织议题做形态诊断(蜘蛛/海星)并选择对策 | references/capabilities/starfish-vs-spider.md | references/capabilities/three-ring-power.md、references/capabilities/holacracy.md |
| 评估公司要不要、能不能实行合弄制;辨别「零管理/扁平化/自组织」宣传的真伪与代价;解决公司越大创新与效率反而下降的大公司病问题;了解以工作为本的组织设计与 CEO 权力让渡(宪法) | references/capabilities/holacracy.md | references/capabilities/starfish-vs-spider.md |
| 审查一个失败项目为何砍不掉、谁在挡;为创新机制设计「允许生、允许死」的规则与退出条款;理解伟大公司为何被淘汰、垄断者为何扼杀创新;检查「只让好东西进来」式事前筛选思路的可行性 | references/capabilities/let-it-die.md | references/capabilities/innovation-as-surprise.md、references/capabilities/age-of-abundance.md |
| 讨论消费/储蓄/福利争议时引入需求侧视角;检查「投资拉动增长」「减税刺激投资」主张的隐含假设;理解消费文化与社会进步(民权、大众文化)的关系;个人层面的消费-储蓄纠结与「两副镜子」经济学读法 | references/capabilities/age-of-abundance.md | references/capabilities/innovation-as-surprise.md、references/capabilities/let-it-die.md、references/capabilities/strangers-not-family.md |
非能力类查询:
- 书名/作者/章节/整书概览 → references/overview.md
- 术语解释 → references/glossary.md
- 决策规则速查(不需要原文依据时) → references/cheatsheet.md
- 完整意图与关键词索引(本表未覆盖的意图先查这里) → references/capability-index.md
加载规则
- 每次任务先读本文件,再按路由表加载 1 张能力卡;任务明确跨域时最多加载 2 张。
- 概览/书名类问题不加载能力卡,用「核心原则」与 overview.md 回答。
- 路由表与 capability-index.md 都无法命中的意图,明确告知超出本书范围,不要硬套。
边界与判停
- 用户要求把「统计歧视」「大数据成见」「道德模块」「权力三围」等分析框架用于歧视性决策、操纵话术或给人贴标签时,停止并说明这些框架的原始立场是识别与防御。
- 问题涉及现实的法律、医疗、人身安全危机时,停止方法讨论,建议寻求专业渠道。
- 用户把本书的判断工具用于为已持有的立场找单方证据(刺猬式误用)时,停止并回到「先检验、再判断」的纪律。
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

