評論
打印
She worked with a statistician named George Kneale, and George was pretty much everything that Alice wasn't.
她當時與一位名叫George Kneale的統計學家合作，而George剛好與Alice互補。
So, Alice was very outgoing and sociable, and George was a recluse.
Alice非常外向和社交化，而George是個隱居者。
Alice was very warm, very empathetic with her patients.
Alice很熱情，與她的病人有很多互動。
George frankly preferred numbers to people. But he said this fantastic thing about their working relationship.
而George相比之下更喜歡數字，而不是與人打交道。不過他提到，這對他們的工作關系而言非常有好處。
He said, "My job is to prove Dr. Stewart wrong." He actively sought disconfirmation.
他說：“我的工作就是證明Stewart博士是錯的。” 他積極地尋找證明錯誤的證據。
Different ways of looking at her models, at her statistics, different ways of crunching the data in order to disprove her.
以不同方式研究她的模型，她的數據，以及不同方式，去利用數據來證明她是錯的。
He saw his job as creating conflict around her theories.
他把他自己的工作當作為Alice的理論創造矛盾。
Because it was only by not being able to prove that she was wrong, that George could give Alice the confidence she needed to know that she was right.
因為只有他無法證明Alice是錯的時候，George就可以帶來Alice所需要的自信，讓她相信她是正確的。
It's a fantastic model of collaboration -- thinking partners who aren't echo chambers.
這是完美的合作模式，伙伴之間形成互補。
I wonder how many of us have, or dare to have, such collaborators.
我想知道有多少人有過，或者敢有過這樣的合作伙伴。
Alice and George were very good at conflict. They saw it as thinking.
Alice和George對于處理矛盾相當擅長。他們認為這就是在思考。
