楊瑞

“In this book， I have summed up how to put your space in order in a way that will change your life forever.”

This is the ambitious first sentence of Marie Kondo1）s best-selling manifesto， The Life-Changing Magic of Tidying Up. Direct and devoid of clutter， this sentence rings true to her philosophy. Unlike most self-help books， there are no extraneous words， no pandering2）—the lack of “wink wink” gesturing reads as an appealing， authentic statement.

In the introduction of her book， Kondo quantifies the power of her advice—she estimates that shes helped her clients dispose of no fewer than a million items. This number is astonishing， but a key element of Kondos argument is that hardly anyone is aware of how many items he or she owns. Most wouldnt even notice if some of those items are gone， she argues， but the problem is that throwing things out and putting belongings in the right place requires jumping through some psychological hoops3）.

Why do people have so much trouble throwing things out？ Turns out， the answer lies in peoples heads. Running through Kondos best advice and most of her book is the argument about the anxiety-induced limits of human decision-making. Seeing as an entire branch of economics studies exactly that， its no wonder that economists have a particular interest in her advice. Financial Times columnist Tim Harford agrees that Kondos methods are not only intuitive， but compelling to economists. Harford says that the clutter that piles up in apartments is a product of peoples cognitive blunders4）.

In my reading and practice of the eponymous5） “KonMari Method，” I found that Kondo does implicitly touch on some important behavioral economics concepts and cognitive biases that prevent us from being tidy. She takes strong stances against these irrational mental habits that govern us. In other words， I think the reason Kondo-mania continues is because she has actually hit upon some good solutions to deal with these pervasive mental fallacies.

For example， Kondo aptly6） attacks whats called the sunk-cost fallacy7）. The term “sunk cost” applies to payments （of time or money） that have already occurred and thus cant be recovered. The moneys spent， an investment has been made， and it makes people irrational because it seems a waste to not use something that one has poured resources into. The irrationality of this thinking is that people ignore whether an item they own is still useful to them， and whether theyll actually use or resell it. In my tidying efforts， I find that the sunk-cost fallacy hits harder for new items， because unused items retain more value in resale. Kondos advice is to get rid of them， and her faith in keeping only the things that “bring us joy” addresses the economic concept of opportunity cost8）： The mental and physical toll of keeping an unused item around is greater than throwing it out.

Harford， the FT columnist， found that the KonMari Method addressed other economic concepts， such as the status-quo bias9） and diminishing returns10）. He writes： “Status quo bias means that most of your stuff stays because you cant think of a good reason to get rid of it. Kondo turns things around. For her， the status quo is that every item you own will be thrown away unless you can think of a compelling reason why it should stay.” I found that this new status quo was particularly helpful in discarding paper， namely because I couldnt find a compelling reason to hang onto all my credit card statements. They came in the mail， and I kept them just because thats what I always did. Kondos method sets a new status quo： Throw them out. My boyfriend and I took this one step further， cancelling our paper statements for credit cards and utilities.

I found it a bit harder to put Kondos wariness of diminishing returns—the idea that the more you have of something， the less valuable each successive item is—into practice. Perhaps it was because this most applies to the items I have the hardest time throwing out： clothes. Kondos method of putting all of whatever-item-is-being-evaluated on the floor not only overwhelmed me， but it also made me anxious. It reminded me that the reasons I have so much clothing are that firstly I want to be prepared in case I dont have time for laundry in a given week， and secondly that the neurological pleasure of cheap fashion is very scary and real. Because of my laundry concern， the idea of having three pairs of identical black work pants seems pragmatic to me. I could see the diminishing returns of having 20 T-shirts， so I discarded the ones that dont fit.

Another important point that Kondo protects us from is the folly of prediction： People systematically make terrible guesses about the future. So instead， people should focus on the present， and in tidying， this manifests in the form of using present-day valuations of all of ones belongings. People are wrong when they think that pair of jeans will ever fit again， Kondo is arguing. Theyre also wrong when they think theyll read that book again. These optimistic predictions keep people from getting rid of things they dont need.

Another way of looking at this fallacy is as a form of loss aversion11）—that humans psychologically hate losing things. Not only do people hate the idea of losing something that might be needed someday， but things that seem valuable just because they belong to us. In one famous study12）， economists Daniel Kahneman， Jack Knetsch， and Richard Thaler demonstrated with a coffee mug that people ascribe much higher value to things they own， simply because they owned them. This means that people might do well to take the KonMari method further， to think hard before acquiring any new belongings.

At first I wasnt able to stray too far from maintaining the number of items I originally owned—I initially stuck to my old notions of the status quo. But Kondo does a convincing job of arguing how thrilling it is to discard items one doesnt like， and it certainly helped me stop counting altogether.

Aside from economics， I also found two less-touted parts of the KonMari method very important in this process of purging. The first is keeping family away when tidying， as sentiment runs high when a family member is around. The other is that the KonMari method should be executed in complete silence. No music， no background movie or TV show. This makes the KonMari method both intense and a bit exhausting， but I have never used my intellect so hard to fight myself in cleaning up my apartment—Ive also never been as successful at it.

My biggest revelation came when I was cleaning my bookshelves： 20 percent of the books didnt even belong to me. I realized that Kondo is right—its actually rare for anyone to notice that something is gone. Cherished books belonging to old roommates， college friends， my father， even an old boss—their owners never got in touch with me， even as were more connected than ever.

A rational place to live doesnt sound very sexy， but a tidy place to live is indeed much more comfortable. And now tidying carries a point of pride beyond having a clean apartment： knowing that were outsmarting our cognitive biases.

“在這本書(shū)中，我總結(jié)了如何使你的空間整齊有序的方法，這種方法將永遠(yuǎn)地改變你的生活?！?/p>

這是《怦然心動(dòng)的人生整理魔法》一書(shū)雄心勃勃的開(kāi)篇詞。這本宣言式的書(shū)是近藤麻理惠最暢銷(xiāo)的作品。書(shū)中開(kāi)篇的這句話(huà)開(kāi)門(mén)見(jiàn)山，干凈利落，真實(shí)地道出了她的理念。與大多數(shù)自助類(lèi)書(shū)籍不同，這本書(shū)沒(méi)有廢話(huà)，不迎合讀者——書(shū)中沒(méi)有那種“討好”式的語(yǔ)句，其陳述引人入勝又真實(shí)可信。

在這本書(shū)的前言部分，近藤通過(guò)數(shù)字來(lái)說(shuō)明她所提建議的影響力——據(jù)她估計(jì)，她幫助客戶(hù)處理了不少于一百萬(wàn)件物品。這個(gè)數(shù)字很驚人，但是近藤的觀(guān)點(diǎn)中關(guān)鍵的一點(diǎn)是，幾乎沒(méi)有人意識(shí)到自己有多少件物品。近藤說(shuō)，大多數(shù)人甚至都不會(huì)注意到這些物品中的一些已經(jīng)不在了，但問(wèn)題在于，要丟棄東西以及把自己的物品放在正確的地方，這需要我們經(jīng)受心理上的磨練。

為什么人們?nèi)訓(xùn)|西會(huì)這么難呢？原來(lái)，問(wèn)題出在人們的思想上。焦慮會(huì)導(dǎo)致人們?cè)谧龀鰶Q定時(shí)受到局限，這一論點(diǎn)是近藤最佳建議的核心，貫穿了她那本書(shū)的大部分章節(jié)?？吹浇?jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)有完整的一個(gè)分支研究的就是這個(gè)，難怪那些經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家會(huì)對(duì)近藤的建議特別感興趣呢。《金融時(shí)報(bào)》的專(zhuān)欄撰稿人蒂姆·哈福德認(rèn)為，近藤的方法不僅基于直覺(jué)，而且令經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家著迷。哈福德說(shuō)，公寓里堆砌的雜物是人類(lèi)認(rèn)知錯(cuò)誤的產(chǎn)物。

在閱讀《怦然心動(dòng)的人生整理魔法》以及實(shí)踐與書(shū)名同名的方法的過(guò)程中，我發(fā)現(xiàn)近藤的確隱約觸及到了一些重要的行為經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)概念和認(rèn)知偏見(jiàn)，正是這些概念和偏見(jiàn)阻礙我們變得井井有條。近藤?gòu)?qiáng)烈地批判了這些支配著我們的非理性思維習(xí)慣。換句話(huà)說(shuō)，我認(rèn)為近藤一直風(fēng)靡的原因就在于她真的找到了解決這些普遍心理誤區(qū)的好方法。

例如，近藤巧妙地抨擊了所謂的沉沒(méi)成本誤區(qū)?！俺翛](méi)成本”這個(gè)詞指的是那些已經(jīng)發(fā)生并且無(wú)法收回的付出（比如時(shí)間或金錢(qián)）。錢(qián)花了，投資做了，對(duì)于這些已經(jīng)投入資源的東西，如果不用似乎就是浪費(fèi)，因此人們會(huì)變得不理性。這種觀(guān)念的不理智之處在于，人們忽略了他們所擁有的物品對(duì)自己來(lái)說(shuō)是否還有用，以及他們以后是否真的會(huì)用還是會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)賣(mài)掉。在我努力整理的過(guò)程中，我發(fā)現(xiàn)沉沒(méi)成本誤區(qū)在新東西上體現(xiàn)得尤為明顯，因?yàn)闆](méi)用過(guò)的東西在再銷(xiāo)售時(shí)更有價(jià)值。近藤的建議是徹底擺脫這些東西。她的理念是只留下那些“讓我們怦然心動(dòng)”的東西。該理念討論的就是機(jī)會(huì)成本這個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)概念：相比于扔掉一件無(wú)用的物品，保留它所造成的心理傷害和實(shí)際損失要更大。

《金融時(shí)報(bào)》專(zhuān)欄撰稿人哈福德發(fā)現(xiàn)近藤麻理惠的方法也討論了其他經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)概念，例如維持現(xiàn)狀偏見(jiàn)和邊際效用遞減規(guī)律。他寫(xiě)道：“維持現(xiàn)狀偏見(jiàn)的意思是，大部分東西得以保留，是因?yàn)槟阏也坏揭粋€(gè)正當(dāng)?shù)睦碛蓙?lái)扔掉它們。近藤把這個(gè)道理反過(guò)來(lái)說(shuō)。對(duì)她來(lái)說(shuō)，維持現(xiàn)狀就是你擁有的每一件物品都將被扔掉，除非你能想到把它留下的迫切理由?！蔽野l(fā)現(xiàn)這種新的維持現(xiàn)狀理念對(duì)丟棄紙張大有益處，因?yàn)槲艺也坏揭粋€(gè)迫切的理由來(lái)保留所有的信用卡對(duì)賬單。這些對(duì)賬單是郵寄給我的，我留著它們僅僅是因?yàn)槲乙恢倍歼@么做。近藤的方法設(shè)立了一種新的現(xiàn)狀：扔掉它們。我和男友的做法則更進(jìn)一步：取消了信用卡和水電氣的紙質(zhì)對(duì)賬單。

近藤提醒要謹(jǐn)防邊際效用遞減規(guī)律，即你擁有的一種物品的數(shù)量越多，每個(gè)單件物品的價(jià)值就會(huì)逐漸越少。我發(fā)現(xiàn)要將這一點(diǎn)付諸實(shí)踐有點(diǎn)難。也許是因?yàn)檫@一規(guī)律主要適用于丟棄對(duì)我來(lái)說(shuō)最難丟棄的東西——衣服。近藤的方法是把所有要接受估值的物品擺放在地板上，這既讓我感到不知所措，也使我感到焦慮。這讓我想起我之所以有這么多衣服是因?yàn)椋菏紫?，我要多?zhǔn)備一些衣服以防在某一周內(nèi)沒(méi)有時(shí)間去洗衣服；其次，廉價(jià)時(shí)裝帶來(lái)的神經(jīng)興奮是非常驚人且真實(shí)的。因?yàn)閾?dān)心洗衣服的問(wèn)題，所以擁有三條一模一樣的黑色工裝短褲對(duì)我來(lái)說(shuō)似乎挺實(shí)用的。但我也體會(huì)得到擁有20件T恤的邊際效用遞減規(guī)律，所以那些不合身的T恤我都扔掉了。

近藤防止我們進(jìn)入的另一個(gè)很重要的誤區(qū)是犯傻去預(yù)測(cè)未來(lái)：人們經(jīng)常對(duì)未來(lái)做一些糟糕的猜測(cè)。所以人們應(yīng)該反過(guò)來(lái)著眼于現(xiàn)在，著眼于整理空間，這體現(xiàn)在根據(jù)當(dāng)下的估值來(lái)衡量一個(gè)人的所有物品。近藤認(rèn)為，人們要是以為那條牛仔褲以后會(huì)合身的話(huà)，那就錯(cuò)了。人們要是以為那本書(shū)他們以后還會(huì)讀，那也錯(cuò)了。這些樂(lè)觀(guān)的預(yù)測(cè)會(huì)阻止人們?nèi)拥羲麄儾恍枰臇|西。

這種心理誤區(qū)也可以看成是一種損失厭惡，即人們?cè)谛睦砩暇褪菂拹菏|西。人們不僅厭惡失去那些某天或許會(huì)派上用場(chǎng)的東西，還厭惡失去那些僅僅因?yàn)槲覀儞碛胁潘坪跤袃r(jià)值的東西。在一項(xiàng)著名的研究中，經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家丹尼爾·卡內(nèi)曼、杰克·尼奇和理查德·泰勒用一個(gè)咖啡杯證明人們會(huì)賦予自己擁有的東西更高的價(jià)值，僅僅是因?yàn)樗麄儞碛羞@些東西。這意味著人們或許最好采取比近藤麻理惠的整理術(shù)更嚴(yán)苛的方式，即在獲取任何新物品之前都三思。

起初，我會(huì)維持自己原本擁有的物品的數(shù)量，做不到舍棄太多——我最初抱著維持現(xiàn)狀的老觀(guān)念不放。但近藤很有說(shuō)服力，她讓我相信扔掉自己不喜歡的物品有多么令人激動(dòng)，而這確實(shí)讓我不再統(tǒng)計(jì)物品的數(shù)量了。

除經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)概念之外，我還發(fā)現(xiàn)在清理物品的過(guò)程中，近藤麻理惠的方法里有兩點(diǎn)不那么受人追捧，卻是極為重要的。第一點(diǎn)是在整理時(shí)讓家人離開(kāi)，因?yàn)榧胰嗽谏磉厱r(shí)我們會(huì)情緒激動(dòng)。第二點(diǎn)是近藤麻理惠的方法要在絕對(duì)安靜的環(huán)境下實(shí)行。不能有音樂(lè)，不能有電影或電視節(jié)目作為背景音。這樣一來(lái)，近藤麻理惠的方法會(huì)令人緊張，又令人覺(jué)得有些精疲力竭。但我在整理公寓時(shí)從來(lái)沒(méi)這么費(fèi)腦子跟自己斗爭(zhēng)過(guò)——也從來(lái)沒(méi)有如此成功過(guò)。

我最大的啟示是我在整理書(shū)架時(shí)領(lǐng)悟到的：書(shū)架上20%的書(shū)根本就不是我的。我意識(shí)到近藤是對(duì)的——人們真的很少能注意到某件東西丟了。這些珍貴的書(shū)屬于我以前的室友、大學(xué)時(shí)的朋友、我爸爸甚至我以前的一位老板——這些書(shū)的所有者從來(lái)沒(méi)跟我提過(guò)它們，即使我們現(xiàn)在的聯(lián)系比以前更密切。

一個(gè)理性的住所聽(tīng)起來(lái)并不那么吸引人，但一個(gè)整潔的住所的確會(huì)舒適很多?，F(xiàn)如今，整理空間不僅讓我們擁有一個(gè)整潔的公寓，還會(huì)帶來(lái)些許自豪：我們知道自己戰(zhàn)勝了認(rèn)知偏見(jiàn)。