73%的解决方案

每当有人全心全意地同意我写的东西时，我的内心就会有些崩溃。我知道意见专栏作家应该从事说服工作，这使得共识成为这个领域的硬币。但即时的、下意识的同意让我产生了怀疑。那枚硬币已经贬值了。

Whenever someone wholeheartedly agrees with something Carlos Lozada writes, he feels a sense of unease. He believes that opinion columnists should aim to persuade readers, and complete agreement suggests a lack of persuasion.

每当有人全心全意地同意卡洛斯·洛扎达所写的某些内容时，他就会感到不安。他认为，观点专栏作家应该以说服读者为目标，完全同意则表明缺乏说服力。

Lozada prefers principled dissent, thoughtful counterarguments, or even enthusiastic opposition over complete agreement. He feels that complete agreement, whether expressed in writing, speech, or emojis, indicates that he has not persuaded the reader of anything but rather affirmed their existing beliefs.

洛萨达更喜欢原则上的异议、深思熟虑的反驳，甚至热情的反对，而不是完全同意。他认为，完全同意，无论是通过书面、演讲还是表情符号表达，都表明他没有说服读者任何事情，而是肯定了他们现有的信念。

He finds complete agreement suspicious, especially in the context of politics or culture podcasts or cable news round tables, where he observes moments of 100% vociferous agreement. While audiences often express concern about contrarian shout-fests in the mainstream media, Lozada is more troubled by the self-assured nod-fests.

他发现完全一致是可疑的，特别是在政治或文化播客或有线新闻圆桌会议的背景下，他观察到 100% 大声同意的时刻。虽然观众经常对主流媒体的逆势喊话表示担忧，但洛扎达更担心的是自信的点头盛会。

He acknowledges that figures of speech like "this!" or "co-sign" are particularly common on social media and that people may not always fully consider their implications. However, he believes that one element driving the disagreement among America's various political and cultural camps is the push for uniformity within those camps.

他承认像“这个！”这样的修辞手法。或“共同签名”在社交媒体上尤其常见，人们可能并不总是充分考虑其含义。然而，他认为导致美国各个政治和文化阵营之间分歧的一个因素是推动这些阵营内部的统一。

When one side or another embraces complete agreement regarding a topic, it can tempt opponents to take refuge in the precise opposite view, leading to the clustering of viewpoints and the creation of echo chambers.

当一方或另一方就某个话题达成完全一致时，可能会诱使反对者转而寻求完全相反的观点，从而导致观点聚集和回声室的产生。

Despite being an opinion columnist who aims to persuade readers, Lozada encourages them not to agree with him 100%. He suggests a figure of 73% agreement, which he notes is the percentage of Americans who rank their finances as the top source of stress in their lives, favor term or age limits for Supreme Court justices, or believe in heaven.

尽管洛萨达是一位旨在说服读者的观点专栏作家，但他鼓励读者不要百分百同意他的观点。他提出了 73% 的同意率，他指出这是将财务状况视为生活中最大压力来源、支持最​​高法院法官任期或年龄限制或相信天堂的美国人的百分比。

He envisions a scenario where talking heads on cable news or podcasts might engage in nuanced discussions, agreeing with each other partially but also introducing new perspectives or points of disagreement. He believes that such conversations would be more engaging and productive.

他设想了一种场景，有线新闻或播客上的评论家可能会进行细致入微的讨论，彼此部分达成一致，但也会引入新的观点或分歧点。他相信这样的对话会更有吸引力、更富有成效。