有一天，一位女士跟我說，她看過所有我所有著作、出席過我所有講座，更是這個專欄的忠實讀者，我感到很榮幸，直至她拿出一張「擇偶清單」，叫我根據她的條件幫她找另一半時，頓時令我大失所望。很明顯，無論她之前看過甚麼書或聽過甚麼講座，都沒有將內容好好吸收。德文有個詞語“wahrnehmen＂，不僅是表面的「知道」，而是「深層次地瞭解」。當我們「知道」某些事時，並不一定對該事了解，「知道」不一定等於對該事有洞察力或理解。

　　今次我想講講數字的威力，數字能清楚表達意思，有些人對文字反應較弱，對數字反而敏感一點。在生活中，很多東西都以數字表達，例如等級、分數、重量、三圍、股票指數、外幣匯率等。在日常生活中，我們會追求一些無意義的數字，沉迷其中，甚至為其苦惱。我們會以貴得離譜的價錢購買車牌號碼或高層住宅，就算實際的層數不是地產商所說的那樣！另外，人們對年齡異常敏感，年過40的男人很少會約會35歲以上的女人，就好像她們有蚤一樣。事實上，我們對數字的看法可能很荒謬愚蠢，但數字確實是國際間最具權威的指標之一，更會一直影響著我們的生活。

　　以下一組數據，是由政府數據、婚姻介紹所研究數據，以及我們過往5年數據庫的資料數據綜合所得：

　　女士們，如果你愛交際又不太高要求，又只根據以上條件找另一半的話，你所身處的區域應該有1.7個男人適合你，如果你降低擇偶條件，少些要求的話，會有更多男人適合你。

　　以上數據會不會有出錯的可能？當然有可能，很多預言先知、科學家對瑪亞預言有類同的觀點，但2012年12月21日，我們都安然度過。標準普爾將冰島評級為AA，直至2006年，3間銀行全部倒閉，繼而冰島宣布破產......國際級的經濟學家，包括格林斯潘，對雷曼兄弟充滿信心，結果雷曼兄弟都破產收場。經濟和數學天才對希臘和歐豬五國的評價都令人大跌眼鏡，還有無數例子……所以如果你想嘲笑我所提供的數據、懷疑它的準確性、貶低其相關性的話，我是不會生氣的，最重要的是去追溯出錯的地方，以上的列表只包括總數120萬的納稅人，所以不可能令數據結果有很大差別，這是你要接受的事實。

　　我一向主張適可而止和包容的態度，勸勉別人不要在擇偶時有一大堆條件，不要太固執和愛批評，懇請各位女士要自我增值一番，裝扮自己，做個更好的人，不要太早或太容易放棄。

　　（按：中文內容乃翻譯及撮寫版本）

Saying it in Numbers

　　A new client claimed to have read all my books, attended all my talks and has been a faithful follower of my ETNET columns. I was flattered… until she took out her list and asked me to find her a man according to those criteria… Obviously, whatever she might have read or heard, nothing has registered . The Germans have a word for that, it’s called “wahrnehmen” , meaning a deeper “know” as versus the ordinary “know”. When we “know” something, we are merely informed, “knowing” does not automatically equate percipience or apprehension.

　　I’d like to try saying it in numbers today, because numbers are more lucid and some people react better to numbers than to words. A grade is a number, a score is a number; be it the weight on a scale , body measurements, stock market index… exchange rates… we fret and frolic over silly little numbers all day long, whether legitimate or ludicrous. We pay exorbitant prices for car number plates, or flats in high floors even when the actual floor level has nothing to do with what the developer claims it to be ! People are hypersensitive to a person’s numerical age,  men in their 40’s would seldom date a woman above 35 - as if they had fleas…. Yes, we can be pretty stupid about numbers, but they continue to influence our lives and remain a powerful barometer in our world.

　　The following findings have been calculated based on a combination of government statistics, research figures conducted by the Matchmaking Institute,  computer analysis of our huge database over the past 5 years, plus of course, the laws of average:

　　In other words ladies, if you are sociable and undemanding, seeking men with only the above criteria, there should be 1.7 men in your district available for you. More if you lower your requirements and less if you increase your demands.

　　Can these figures be erroneous ? Possible. After all, prophets and scientists converged on the Mayan calendar and they were all wrong about 21/Dec/2012.  Standard & Poor still rated Iceland AA - in Dec 2006, then all 3 banks collapsed and Iceland was bankrupt… World class economists were wrong about Lehman Brothers, including Greenspan . Mathematical geniuses were wrong about Greece and the PIIGS …and the list continues. So if you want to scoff at my calculations, question their accuracy, relegate their relevance, I won’t be offended. The key point here is trace the culprit - with the given data of only 1.2 million tax payers in total, there just isn’t a whole lot you could do to make the numbers look substantially different. This is a fact you have to live with.

　　I have been advocating moderation and tolerance…admonishing people with long lists of criteria, cautioning against being  pertinacious or judgmental… pleading with ladies to engage in self enhancement, look better, be a better person… not to discard too soon…

　　And this is why.