思考者和不思考者的阶层分化，来自这一个选择。

原文：Writes and Write-Nots^[1]

作者：paul graham

翻译：@howie.serious

I'm usually reluctant to make predictions about technology, but I feel fairly confident about this one: in a couple decades there won't be many people who can write.

我通常不愿意预测技术问题，但我对这个预测相当有信心：几十年后，有写作能力的人，不会很多。

One of the strangest things you learn if you're a writer is how many people have trouble writing. Doctors know how many people have a mole they're worried about; people who are good at setting up computers know how many people aren't; writers know how many people need help writing.

如果你成为一个写作者，你会发现的离奇现象之一就是有多少人有写作困难。就像医生会发现有多少人在焦虑他们长了一颗痣；擅长设置电脑的人会发现有多少人不会设置电脑；写作者会发现有多少人在写作上需要帮助。

The reason so many people have trouble writing is that it's fundamentally difficult. To write well you have to think clearly, and thinking clearly is hard.

如此多人有写作困难的原因，是写作在本质上是困难的。要写得好，你必须清晰思考，而清晰思考在本质上是困难的。

And yet writing pervades many jobs, and the more prestigious the job, the more writing it tends to require.

然而，写作渗透在诸多工作岗位中，工作越受人尊重，对写作的需求就越大。

These two powerful opposing forces, the pervasive expectation of writing and the irreducible difficulty of doing it, create enormous pressure. This is why eminent professors often turn out to have resorted to plagiarism. The most striking thing to me about these cases is the pettiness of the thefts. The stuff they steal is usually the most mundane boilerplate — the sort of thing that anyone who was even halfway decent at writing could turn out with no effort at all. Which means they're not even halfway decent at writing.

两种强大的对立力量——无法逃避的写作需求和无法降低的写作困难——造成了巨大的压力。这就是为什么杰出教授会铤而走险选择抄袭。这些案例中，最让我震惊的是“抄袭金额”之微小。他们偷窃的东西通常是最平庸的套话——哪怕是半桶水的写作者都能毫不费力写出来的东西。也就是说，这些教授在写作上连半桶水都不到。

Till recently there was no convenient escape valve for the pressure created by these opposing forces. You could pay someone to write for you, like JFK, or plagiarize, like MLK, but if you couldn't buy or steal words, you had to write them yourself. And as a result nearly everyone who was expected to write had to learn how.

直到不久前，世界上还不存在能轻易释放这种写作压力的“泄压阀”。你可以花钱找写作枪手，像肯尼迪那样，或者直接抄袭，像马丁·路德·金那样，但如果你没法买也不敢偷，你就得亲自写。结果就是，几乎所有被期望写作的人，不得不学习如何写作。

Not anymore. AI has blown this world open. Almost all pressure to write has dissipated. You can have AI do it for you, both in school and at work.

现在不必了。AI已经炸开了旧世界，几乎所有的写作压力都被释放了。你可以让 AI 替你写作，不论是在学校还是在工作中。

The result will be a world divided into writes and write-nots. There will still be some people who can write. Some of us like it. But the middle ground between those who are good at writing and those who can't write at all will disappear. Instead of good writers, ok writers, and people who can't write, there will just be good writers and people who can't write.

结果就是，这个世界将会分裂为写作者和不写作者两个阶层^[2]。世界上仍然会有一些人拥有写作能力。有些人类就是喜欢写作本身。但是，优秀写作者和完全不会写作的人之间的中间地带将会消失：不再会有好的写作者，一般写作者和不会写作的人，只会有好的写作者，和不会写作的人。

Is that so bad? Isn't it common for skills to disappear when technology makes them obsolete? There aren't many blacksmiths left, and it doesn't seem to be a problem.

这有什么问题吗？技术进步使某些技能过时，这些技能消失不是正常现象吗？现代社会没剩下几个铁匠了，但这并不是个问题啊。

Yes, it's bad. The reason is something I mentioned earlier: writing is thinking. In fact there's a kind of thinking that can only be done by writing. You can't make this point better than Leslie Lamport did:

错，这是个问题。原因在于我前面提到的：写作就是思考本身。事实上，有一种思考只能通过写作完成。对此，莱斯利·兰帕特^[3]的表述无比精准：

If you're thinking without writing, you only think you're thinking.

如果你思考而不写作，你只是以为自己在思考。

So a world divided into writes and write-nots is more dangerous than it sounds. It will be a world of thinks and think-nots. I know which half I want to be in, and I bet you do too.

因此，当人们分化写作者和不写作者两个阶层，这个极化的世界比听起来更危险。本质上，这是思考者和不思考者的阶层分化。我知道自己想活在哪个世界，我打赌你也知道。

This situation is not unprecedented. In preindustrial times most people's jobs made them strong. Now if you want to be strong, you work out. So there are still strong people, but only those who choose to be.

这种情况并非第一次发生。在前工业化时代，大多数工作使人身体强壮。现在，如果你想强壮，你需要锻炼。世界上仍然会有强壮的人，但他们只可能是那些主动选择强壮的人。

It will be the same with writing. There will still be smart people, but only those who choose to be.

写作的情况与此完全一致。世界上仍然会有聪明的人，但他们只可能是那些主动选择聪明的人。

one more thing

paul graham 的这篇文章，虽然很短，但很重要（值得多次诵读，甚至背诵。我翻译时，原文读了5678遍，译文也改了5678轮）。他点明了一个巨大且重要的真相：写作与思考的关系，我们为什么要坚持写作，坚持思考。

“如果你思考而不写作，你只是以为自己在思考。” 这句话，我感受太深。在我2012年的年度目标里，就有这么一条：成为一个 writer。不是说要成为一个专职作家，而是成为一个“写作的人”，成为 one of the writes。多年以后，我仍然坚信，包括我自己，包括小树，我们都必须成为一个“写作的人”。

具体来讲，“写作”不是在互联网上像小狗撒尿或者电线杆上糊牛皮藓广告，到处张贴文字垃圾（有很多人教你这么做，说什么打造个人IP，别信，没用）。对于 80% 以上的人，真正的写作更多是发生在学习场景、工作场景中的文字书写，是写笔记，在自己的笔记工具、自己的知识管理系统里。

因为，写作的本质是思考。而学习的本质也是思考。学习与思考之间，有一个共同的桥梁：写作。

通过写作，大量的写笔记，写费曼笔记，配合适当的文章输出，我们才能抵达清晰的思考，有效的学习。

下周，第一期《费曼学习法训练营》就要开营了。一句话总结的话，就是在 ChatGPT 时代，在世界愈发分化为思考者阶层和不思考者阶层的时代，如何做到更好的学习，更好的思考，更好的写作。

掌握这一套方法，你会写作-思考-学习的这条终身学习之路上，走得更快更好更远。

点击“阅读原文”，21 天，21 个小时，做一件你会感谢你自己的事情。

footnotes

[1]

Writes and Write-Nots: https://paulgraham.com/writes.html

[2]

写作者和不写作者两个阶层: writes和write-nots,借鉴经济维度的阶层划分：有产者和无产者，haves和have-nots

[3]

莱斯利·兰帕特: 图灵奖得主，LaTex发明人，被誉为“分布式计算”之父