《灰階思考》的作者謝孟恭是知名的Podcast節目「股癌」製作人，雖然沒聽過節目，但前陣子一直聽到這本書，看書名原以為是在講邏輯思考方面，看了之後才發現其實是在講股市投資，不過也是有關於股市投資的心法，說是邏輯思考也沒錯。
這本書共有三部，第一部掃雷：掃除阻礙思考的常識；第二部備糧：建構判讀的作業系統；第三部上陣：面對多變的市場。比起國外的一些翻譯書籍，作者用的例子讀來更平易近人，也難怪「股癌」會有那麼多人收聽。
一、灰階思考-為絕對保留可能性
《灰階思考》封面寫「黑白之間都是灰，找到無限價值的所在」，投資是一輩子的事，唯一不會變的的是「永遠都在變」，根據統計，2017全美前500大的平均壽命低於20年，預估到了2027會變12年；但另一項數據又顯示，7%的貢獻了羅素3000指數的70倍以上成長。但我們能確定能選到不會倒的企業嗎?
另外，漲多不一定必跌，跌深也不一定反彈。市場充滿隨機與不確定性，所以千萬別認為「這樣的現象就一定會導致那樣的結果」，如果認為漲多必跌，那將錯過成長，如果認為跌多必漲，那就可能掉進深淵，在自己的防守範圍內多下功夫，比較能避免非黑即白的對立狀況。
二、投資的心法：大道至簡，從投資大盤開始
新手剛開始要投資，作者建議建議先從投資大盤開始，並且在投資過程中，認清自己是怎樣的人。很多人會自己選股，是自認為自己可以打敗大盤，不過作者也說，在投資路上，用功只是基本，作者曾不分晝夜研究股票，還因此得了乾眼症，即便覺得績效已經不錯，每天也花了五六個小時在研究。
直到現在，作者有了小孩後，也是定期買市值型的ETF，用約2成的資金投入任何覺得有意思的股票。
三、如何找到正確資料：多看原型，多點好奇
身處於資訊爆炸的時代，我們已經不用再求資料的豐富性，反而要有找到第一手的正確資料與判讀資料的能力，面對資料，更要保持好奇心，避免被資料所誤導。
要如何找到第一手的正確資料，作者分享美國證券交易委會規定管理超過一億元的投資機構所出的的13F報告，這就像市面上有許多巴菲特的書，是解析的角度寫的，那倒不如先看出自巴菲特之手的書。
其次，可以看「大師論大局」的文章，拜讀大師在每個時局分享的備忘錄，而在這些備忘錄中，也可以發現大師都勇於更新，修正自己的價值觀，如價值投資派的指標人物霍華馬克思，也在2021年發表萬字文，重新定義價值投資，並感謝自己兒子為家族購買比特幣，這也呼應第一點提到的，凡事沒有絕對，都有變化的可能。
另外，可以閱讀國內外券商整理的報告，選擇與自己投資標的有關的，再試著從中統指出結論，讓自己「看多元」而不是「看很多」，進而累積判斷力。
後見
在選舉年的時候，閱讀《灰階思考》特別有感，不論黑與白，藍與綠，對與錯，二元思考是最簡單的，尤其現在我們每天接觸的資訊量非常大，我們為了方便，看了懶人包，但其中簡化的訊息也是加工過的，相對的，自然讓我們的思考面向慢慢靠攏了天平的兩端。
就如投資大師，在漫長的投資歲月中，也會不斷修正其觀點，作者書中分享一開始4G剛起步時，很多人說是騙局，但等到殺手級的串流媒體出現，就再也聽不到這樣的言論，而現在已經是5G了。所以保持開放與好奇，持續接受新的事物，面對市場，始終保持謙卑，才能繼續留在市場。
13 comments
If I had encountered this site five years ago I would have been telling everyone about it, and a look at nauticalnook extended that retrospective enthusiasm, the version of me who used to recommend favourite blogs frequently would have made sure friends knew about this one and that earlier enthusiasm is partially returning to me here.
Closed and reopened the tab three times before finally finishing, and a stop at restandrepair held my attention straight through, sometimes content fights for time against my own distraction and the times it wins say something positive about its quality and this post clearly won that fight today afternoon for me.
Now feeling the rare pleasure of trusting a source completely on first encounter, and a look at designdrift extended that initial trust into something more durable, the calibration of trust to evidence is something I do informally and this site has earned high trust through the cumulative weight of multiple consistently good posts already.
A piece that respected the reader by not over explaining the obvious, and a look at wifiwharf continued that calibrated approach, finding the right level of explanation is one of the harder editorial calls and this site has clearly thought carefully about what readers will already know versus what they need help with consistently.
Came across this through a roundabout path and now it is on my regular rotation, and a stop at grovegarnet sealed that decision, the open web still produces serendipitous discoveries when you let the citations and references guide you rather than relying purely on algorithmic feeds for new content recommendations always.
Found the writing surprisingly fresh for what is by now a well covered topic, and a stop at quillmarket kept that freshness going across the related pages, original perspective on familiar ground is hard to come by and this site has clearly earned its place in the conversation rather than just rehashing old ideas.
Now thinking I want more sites built on this kind of editorial foundation, and a stop at pcpartspal extended that wish into a broader hope, sites built on substance and care rather than on metrics and growth are the kind of sites I want to see more of and this one is a small example worth supporting.
Really appreciate that the writer did not overstate the importance of the topic to make the post feel weightier, and a quick visit to basketberry maintained the same modest framing, content that is honest about its own scope rather than inflating itself is the kind I trust and return to repeatedly over time.
Now considering carefully how to share this site with the right audience rather than broadcasting widely, and a look at maplemeadow extended that careful sharing impulse, content worth sharing carefully rather than spamming is content that has earned a higher kind of recommendation and this site has earned that careful shareability throughout pieces.
Thanks for treating the topic with the seriousness it deserves without becoming pompous about it, and a stop at tubecraze continued that balanced treatment, the gap between earnest and self serious is huge and writers who can stay on the right side of it earn my respect when I find them online today.
Appreciated the way each section connected smoothly to the next without abrupt jumps, and a stop at loftlark kept that flow going nicely, transitions are something most blog writers ignore but the difference is huge for the reader who is trying to follow a sustained line of thought today across many different topics.
Thanks again for the post, I learned a couple of things I can actually use later this week, and after I went over quvera the rest of the site looked equally promising, definitely going to spend more time here when I get a free moment over the weekend to read more carefully.
Different feel from the algorithmically optimised posts that dominate the topic, and a stop at dyeandwash reinforced that human touch, you can tell when a site is being run by someone who reads what they publish versus someone just hitting submit and moving on quickly to the next assignment without checking the result.