在本期財(cái)富網(wǎng)站的 “250個(gè)字”書評(píng)專欄中，山姆?麥克納尼與頗具影響力的自由主義作家查爾斯?默里坐談，查爾斯在1984年出版的《節(jié)節(jié)敗退》（Losing Ground）一書幫助前美國總統(tǒng)克林頓提出了福利改革模型，而他在1994年出版的《鐘形曲線》（The Bell Curve）則因種族問題的言論在美國掀起軒然大波。

他最新的著作即將面世，而這次，默里不再挑起爭議，而試圖給人以建議。

默里的新書《壞脾氣者的前進(jìn)指南：有關(guān)走正道、勤思考、寫清楚、過上好日子的行為準(zhǔn)則》（The Curmudgeon's Guide to Getting Ahead: Dos and Don'ts of Right Behavior, Tough Thinking, Clear Writing, and Living a Good Life）在4月由蘭登書屋（Random House）出版，這是一本對應(yīng)屆畢業(yè)生的指導(dǎo)手冊。在此，山姆?麥克納尼將與默里談一談如何才能有一副好文筆，與人為善與做好人之間的區(qū)別，以及比爾?默里電影給人的道德啟發(fā)。

麥克納尼：你在新書的開篇就給出了幾個(gè)“如何在工作場所展示自己”的小建議，你最喜歡哪一個(gè)？

默里： 毫無疑問，我最喜歡第三條建議“把‘喜歡’從口語中刪除”，那些把“喜歡”當(dāng)口頭禪的人簡直會(huì)把我逼瘋。第五條建議“適度使用強(qiáng)硬措辭”也是我的最愛，如果你想要強(qiáng)硬的措辭發(fā)揮最大的效果，就要先把這些說法記下來，然后在合適的場合使用，光靠把同一個(gè)詞連續(xù)重復(fù)五遍是沒什么用的。英語是一種美妙的語言，你要試著發(fā)揮出的最大效果。

你在書中用了很大的篇幅談?wù)撊绾巫龊盟伎己蛯懽?。你寫道“寫作的過程是想出更好創(chuàng)意的最有價(jià)值的工具”，那么你曾收到過的最寶貴的寫作建議是什么？

重寫，重寫，再重寫，這是我的親身經(jīng)驗(yàn)。我不知道其他作家的情況，但就我來說，寫書的過程如同雕刻一般。我一遍遍地審讀草稿，不斷地刪減冗句、增補(bǔ)細(xì)節(jié)，反復(fù)推敲每一句話。常常會(huì)整段刪除，重頭來過。

在你看來，推崇“不做評(píng)判主義”（nonjudgmentalism）有什么問題？

不愿進(jìn)行判斷的唯一原因就是刻意逃避思考。人類與眾不同的地方就在于有著能夠進(jìn)行判斷的認(rèn)知能力，而“不做評(píng)判主義”是對這種能力的否認(rèn)。你可以不贊成但容忍某些人的觀點(diǎn)或行為，這是你的自由。 “不做評(píng)判主義”從道義上說是懦弱的表現(xiàn)形式。

你可以解釋下“與人為善”與“做好人”之間的區(qū)別嗎？

“與人為善”意味著是你的行為可以立即獲得令人愉悅的結(jié)果，而“做好人”則意味著你的行為會(huì)對人類的福祉有所貢獻(xiàn)。有時(shí)，“與人為善”與“做好人”某些時(shí)候是一樣的，但卻并不總是這樣。

你在書中寫道“選擇‘創(chuàng)業(yè)式婚姻’而非‘并購式婚姻’”，這兩種婚姻形式之間有什么區(qū)別？

在“并購式婚姻”中，男女雙方在結(jié)婚時(shí)各自都有著穩(wěn)定的職業(yè)，有時(shí)還有著不錯(cuò)的薪水。而在“創(chuàng)業(yè)式婚姻”中，雙方都是處于剛剛起步的階段。這兩種婚姻形式各有利弊，但我認(rèn)為，在“創(chuàng)業(yè)式婚姻”中，夫妻和諧的情形要更為普遍。夫妻二人在打拼的過程中更能創(chuàng)造特殊的情感鏈接。

你的許多潛在讀者可能信奉無神論和不可知論。他們或許會(huì)遵循一些宗教傳統(tǒng)，但卻并不信教。他們?yōu)楹螒?yīng)該“認(rèn)真地對待宗教”？

在我看來，那些不相信主日學(xué)校的故事、也不愿意思考宗教意義的人，就不能用豐富多彩的、充滿智慧及富有成效的方式去試圖理解宇宙。我并不介意無神論者。但一個(gè)“自信的”無神論者在我看來是魯莽無知的。

假設(shè)我現(xiàn)在二十多歲，進(jìn)了名牌大學(xué)，我渴望在自身所在行業(yè)取得成功，除了你的這本新書之外我還應(yīng)該讀哪些書呢？

我還是單純地認(rèn)為，無論是在工作中還是在靈魂上，美德都是有回報(bào)的。因此，學(xué)習(xí)下《尼各馬可倫理學(xué)》（Nichomachean Ethics）很有幫助，如果做不到，那就把《偷天情緣》（Groundhog Day）多看幾遍吧。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者 唐昕昕

For this installment, 250 Words' Sam McNerney sits down with the influential and incendiary libertarian author

Charles Murray. Murray's 1984 book Losing Ground helped shape welfare reform under President Bill Clinton, and his 1994 release, The Bell Curve, ignited national outrage over its arguments about race.

His new book comes out on Tuesday. This time around, though, Murray isn't courting controversy. He just wants to help.

Murray's latest, The Curmudgeon's Guide to Getting Ahead: Dos and Don'ts of Right Behavior, Tough Thinking, Clear Writing, and Living a Good Life, is a vade mecum for the recent graduate. It was released by Random House on Tuesday. Here, Sam talks to Murray about how to write well, the difference between being nice and being good, and the Bill Murray movie that can help teach morality.

McNerney: You begin The Curmudgeon's Guide to Getting Ahead by outlining a few tips "on the presentation of self in the workplace." What are your favorites?

Murray: Without question, tip #3, "Excise the word 'like' from your spoken English." People who use "like" as a verbal tic drive me nuts. Tip #5, "On the proper use of strong language," is also a favorite. If you want the f-bomb to be a bomb, for example, you've got to hold it in reserve for when it's the mot juste. Repeating it five times in a row doesn't cut it. The English language is a thing of beauty. Tap into its power.

A portion of your book provides a number of suggestions for thinking and writing well. You write that "the process of writing is your most valuable single tool for developing better ideas." What is the most valuable writing advice you've ever received?

I learned it on my own: Rewrite, rewrite, rewrite. I don't know about other writers, but I don't so much write a book as sculpt it. I go through drafts endlessly, chipping away, adding detail, polishing a little with each pass. And frequently throwing out whole paragraphs and starting from scratch.

What's wrong with the celebration of "nonjudgmentalism"?

The only you way can avoid making judgments is if you deliberately refuse to think. That's a rejection of what makes human beings special: the cognitive capacity to make judgments.Tolerance of ideas and behaviors of which you do not approve, but which people should be free to hold and do, is good. Nonjudgmentalism regarding ideas and behaviors is a form of moral cowardice.

Will you explain the difference between being nice and being good?

Being nice means behaving in ways that have immediately pleasant consequences. Being good means behaving in ways that contribute to the welfare of your fellow human beings. Sometimes being nice and being good call for the same behaviors, but often they do not.

You write "be open to a startup marriage instead of a merger marriage." What's the difference between the two?

In a merger marriage, both partners are well established in their careers and usually have comfortable incomes when they tie the knot. In a startup, the bride and groom are both getting started. Each kind of marriage has its own advantages and strengths. I think symbiosis in a marriage is more common in startups. Making your way together from the beginning can create a special bond.

Many people reading your book will be either atheist or agnostic. They might participate in religious traditions, but they are not religious. Why should they "take religion seriously"?

People who decide that the Sunday school stories weren't true and don't give religion another thought are failing to take advantage of a rich, intellectually demanding, and -- in my view --productive way of trying to understand the universe. I don't mind people being atheists. Being aconfident atheist seems to me to be silly, unreflective, and ignorant.

Let's say I'm in my twenties, I attended a well-known college, and I aspire to become successful within my industry. Besides The Curmudgeon's Guide to Getting Ahead, what books should I read?

I'm so na?ve that I think virtue is rewarded in the workplace as well as in one's soul. So study Aristotle's

Nichomachean Ethics. Or, failing that, watch Groundhog Day several times.