斯蒂芬·卡维将这个描述为任务的一开始，你的脑海里就已经知道会有什么的结果。
Steven Covey would describe this as "Starting with the End in Mind."
比起根据其牙齿形状等细节来推测出结果，找出古生物吃什么的直接证据是有价值的。
That is interesting. Discovering direct evidence of what a fossil animal ate, rather than having to infer it from details such as the shape of its teeth, is always valuable.
但在你老板想知道为什么的时候，找借口跟提供合理原因的结果会大相径庭。
When your boss wants to know why, there is a world of difference between offering an excuse and providing a legitimate reason.
要是你本来正参加什么商务会谈，比如人工刺激牧场的田鼠什么的，结果莫名其妙地就爱上了你旁边的陌生人，咋办？
What if you went to a business convention and then, like an artificially stimulated prairie vole, bonded with the nearest stranger?
这个概念描述了一种源自个人或机构基于自身之于别人将做什么的认识而做出理性选择的稳定结果。
This concept describes a stable outcome that results from people or institutions making rational choices based on what they think others will do.
当然这就属于概率和几率的范畴了，数学家们解释的比我好，因为这毕竟还牵扯到随机可能性，机会什么的，那么结果就有可能少有出入了。
This comes down to probability and statistics. There are mathematicians who explain this better. Because this is due to chance and random probability the results can vary each time.
明天发行的《自然科学》杂志里所报道的研究结果表明，“我们需要的是，意识到我们正在做什么的意图”，西里古说。
The results, reported in tomorrow's issue of Science, suggest that "we need intention to be aware of what we are doing," says Sirigu.
结果还不错，如果他改变了什么的话，也不一定意味着一定会有什么不同，没有绝对的事情。
The results were good, if he had changed something, it would have not meant that it would be different, there is no check.
结果还不错，如果他改变了什么的话，也不一定意味着一定会有什么不同，没有绝对的事情。
The results were good, if he had changed something, it would have not meant that it would be different, there is no check.
应用推荐