1. Looking for the classic four arguments
It is said that there are two people, A and B. A pursues personal self-discipline and opposes heteronomy. B insists that personal self-discipline also requires him. Law, the two values ??are diametrically opposed.
One day, when faced with a certain incident, B made a comment and scolded him. Then, A couldn’t see it, so he jumped out and criticized: You are scolding him, what are you doing? Moralist, you are pretending to be moral. You are wrong. We must be self-disciplined, not alienated.
Naturally, B was dissatisfied, so he fought back, going back and forth, each insisting on his own opinion, but in the end there was no result. Another day, B suddenly discovered that A was also "heterodisciplining" others, so he thought he had a handle and jumped out and said: OK, you also said that you want to be self-disciplined and cannot discipline others. What are you doing now? Aren't you in heteronomy? Aren't you slapping yourself in the face? Aren't you saying one thing and doing another, but saying what you mean? B originally thought that A must be speechless, maybe even ashamed, but after hearing this, A looked calm and replied unhurriedly: Xiao B, you see, you are superficial, your understanding is low. Well, don’t you know what “should be” and what “is” are? That is to say, what I am telling you is truth, "should be", that is, how things should be, and my specific behavior belongs to the category of "actuality", that is, what things are actually like. Now there is a discrepancy between "what is" and "what should be", but this does not mean that "should" is wrong. In other words, I did not actually do what I said. That is my limitation, but this It doesn't mean that I don't yearn for it. It doesn't mean that what I said is problematic. Therefore, your criticism of me is nothing.
B is speechless. Another day, B was once again unable to control his behavior, so A stood up and criticized him again, even using indecent words. B naturally retaliated, and the final argument was in a noisy scene again. Let it go.
But after a while, B suddenly came to his senses, "Damn, A just didn't let me discipline others, and criticized and attacked me. Isn't this heteronomy? Since he advocates self-discipline, It's none of his business to discipline others. He can discipline himself. Why should he discipline me? NND, why didn't you use this to fight back against him? So I felt regretful. But the opportunity came again. On this day, B discovered that A was "heteronomous" again, so he jumped out to criticize A again. B obviously forgot the lesson last time. The judges are all smarter than B, and they obviously know what A will do. There is nothing new in doing it, the old tricks are repeated, and we still respond with the profound philosophy of what should be and what is.
The result can be imagined, B still has nothing to do. Although A cannot refute B, it seems that he can always be in an invincible position easily. What is the problem? B is unable to do anything, so he meditates hard under the Bodhi tree.
Until seventy-seven forty-nine days later, a Bodhi leaf fell on B's head, waking him up from his meditation. B suddenly had an epiphany, and it turned out to be this. Person B believes that heterodiscipline is inevitable on the basis of self-discipline in dealing with people and things, so he cannot help but check his own behavior. He is afraid that one day when he disciplines others, others will catch him by his pigtails and say, "Look at what you did in the past." If you are not clean yourself, how can you criticize others? You are a hypocrite and a hypocrite.
A does not have this mental shackles. When A sees others as heteronomous, he can criticize "heteronomy" and advocate "self-discipline". When you are displeased with other people and use yellow teeth and foul language to be heteronomous, you don’t have to worry about others criticizing you for being heteronomous. You have the best shield of “truth” here, and no stonewalling can hurt you: what I say is true. , I just can’t do it, what do you think, does this mean what I said is wrong? No, you are childish, you are superficial, what, ask me if I would feel ashamed and blame myself for often failing to do what I said myself? Damn, how is that possible? Why should I be ashamed and blame myself? I have always longed for it! What? You also say that you should do to others what you don’t want others to do to you? Damn, am I not? Don't you see what I've been longing for? Of course I ask others to be self-disciplined because I want to be self-disciplined. Please note that the "desire" here should refer to "thinking" and has nothing to do with "doing", so I thought about it and that's enough! What? What else are you going to say about extending yourself to others? What kind of truth is this? Get the hell out of here! I don't understand this. B also found that he could copy such behavior to refute A's, but it didn't seem to make much sense, because at most B was in an invincible position at the same time, but conversely, it was impossible to truly fight in this way. Refuting A, in fact, A is invincible.
When faced with an invincible debater, everything you do will appear weak. And there is a very important point. If A's debate method is copied, B will feel that although he is a little stupid, his face is far from thick enough, and he really can't do it.
Finally, there are three points to summarize A’s debating skills. First: Treat your core views in the debate as "what should be". If any remarks you make on other occasions conflict with this, then they must be classified as "what is". Your true thoughts and opinions at the time are not the same. The most important thing is to hit the opponent. This method is an honest and sincere enemy. In short: to be thick-skinned and to be honest.
Second: If there is any loophole in the debate, then muddy it, bypass it, distort it, ignore it, anyway, don’t face it like your opponent. In short: be thick-skinned , just want ***. Third: When debating, use the most stringent standards for others and the loosest standards for yourself. Oh, that’s not accurate enough. To be precise, you don’t need to have standards for yourself. When others have problems, use the most stringent standards. Standards smash it to death. When you have problems, ask others to tolerate them with the most "free", "tolerant" and "rational" mind. In short: to be thick-skinned and to be ***.
If you get this three-flavored true fire, you will have magical power to protect your body, and you will be invincible in the East and the West! Mao Dan’s answer: 1. The standard of self-discipline is definitely subjective. Society has actually lowered the standard of self-discipline. 2. In practice, individual self-discipline often suffers from a large number of insufficient rationality. This situation also requires him to realize that his behavior has given If he causes harm to himself or others, he may be punished. If he is not allowed to do so, he will be ignorant and fearless and continue to make mistakes. I would like to ask what will happen to the cost of maintaining order in this society if we rely entirely on heteronomy? The cost for Xiao Huangying will be very high. But that won't happen because it's unrealistic. Since it is a comparison. 2. Debate about classical Chinese~~Urgent
We do not advocate writing classical Chinese, because we modern people speak modern languages ??and write modern texts.
For example, when we use English at the United Nations, we cannot use classical Chinese. Of course, the Party Central Committee must use modern language when issuing proclamations, and of course modern language must be used when engaging in business activities.
Therefore, our primary and secondary school students must spend the main energy learning modern languages. Do you want to learn classical Chinese? I think you should learn a little bit. The purpose is to understand the literary talent of our ancient Chinese culture.
Getting to know the glory of our ancient Chinese culture will make them a little interested and generate a sense of national pride, but the main time and energy should be spent on learning modern Chinese well. Classical Chinese accounts for 50% of the current high school textbooks, but the time we spend studying it has reached more than 50%, and what we get is less than 20%, so we are overwhelmed with the study of classical Chinese.
Those rural areas with low education cannot even teach modern literature well, let alone classical Chinese. I think the basis for learning modern literature well is to learn standard modern literature well.
Vernacular is modern vernacular, and vernacular has always had its own product. It did not evolve from classical Chinese. Modern vernacular evolved from modern vernacular, and modern vernacular evolved from medieval vernacular. I don’t agree with Mr. Han’s point of view here. He said that only by learning classical Chinese well can one learn vernacular well. This is misleading. For example, eating can make you full, and drinking can make you drunk. You can’t say that I will be drunk by eating and full by drinking. Right wrong? ! Mr. Zhu Ziqing said that vernacular Chinese is much more refined and rigorous than classical Chinese, so why not spend time learning it? Classical Chinese cannot be used as a necessary learning condition for modern literature.
It is said that if you learn classical Chinese well, you will be able to learn vernacular Chinese well. I don’t think there is an inevitable logical connection between this. For example, Kong Yi talked a lot about it, but in fact his classical Chinese was not good. We don’t need to study classical Chinese to learn vernacular. We can learn it from the vernacular books we are exposed to now. Lu Xun and Guo Moruo are both literary masters, but they also wrote in vernacular. They experienced the era of classical Chinese and experienced classical Chinese. situation, so during the May Fourth Movement, through the new culture, they opposed the old literature and advocated the new literature.
If every pore of Lu Xun had been soaked in the sauce vat of classical Chinese, he would not have become Lu Xun. Lu Xun was the leader of the New Culture Movement. He used modern thoughts, modern concepts, and modern thinking. Do we want to use classical Chinese to speak, publish articles, engage in negotiations, and go to the United Nations to speak? It is an ironclad fact that classical Chinese texts have no vitality up to now.
Human beings have created all knowledge, and no one person in the world can master it all. Therefore, our society must divide labor. In the words of ordinary people, beating gongs and selling candies, each doing his own job, using Han Yu It is said that there are specializations in academic fields. After entering university, only those who study the history of Chinese mathematics in the Chinese Department of History and even the Department of Mathematics must master classical Chinese. However, that is to say, we do not encourage all primary and secondary school students to devote a lot of energy to learning classical Chinese, because most of them will become workers, farmers, businessmen, and leading cadres in the future, and may not necessarily need it.
I can say that in our Chinese Department, Ancient Chinese is the most troublesome course for Chinese students. Some of our college students say that reading a few pages of Ancient Chinese text before going to bed at night can replace taking sleeping pills. I think that from elementary school to now, I have never been particularly interested in classical Chinese because I didn’t have that kind of learning environment. And if you tell a primary school student, “Hang on to the clouds and sail across the sea,” he won’t understand it at all. He could only memorize the meaning while shaking his head. Parents watch their children memorize these things all day long. They will never use things in their lives. When they recite them hard, they must feel very uncomfortable. I think this is also A simple truth is that our language is used for communication. Let everyone understand it first. That is to say, primary school students must first be able to communicate with others. Secondly, no matter what, today's parents teach their children the vernacular first when they are born.
We must go back to the basic things and apply what we have learned. Whether it is spoken in vernacular or classical Chinese, it is all Chinese. The fundamental function of language is communication. This includes oral and written. That said, it is also a tool for thinking. I do admit that classical Chinese is relatively concise, but sometimes it is difficult for us to understand just because it is so concise.
When I was studying "The Story of Yueyang Tower", I had to explain one word. In the textbook, "Yueyang Ning" means the third year, but our Chinese teacher said that this year's new textbook has just been revised. , and then I felt that it caused me to have a question. The annotations of classical Chinese were given by predecessors, but were later changed. Learning classical Chinese in this way cannot achieve the purpose of understanding its key points, so there is no need to learn classical Chinese.
I would like to ask you a question. The "China Education News" on April 22 put forward such a view, "Without learning classical Chinese, we can't find our way home." What I want to ask you is, where is our home? Mr. Lu Xun said that when I opened history, the whole book was filled with benevolence, righteousness and morality. After reading carefully for a long time, I saw two words between the words "eat people". This country is full of monarchs and ministers, fathers and sons, and the ethical outline. As well as a home with a strict feudal hierarchy, a home with no human rights, no equality, and no law at all, do we want to take the majority of young people back? We must inherit excellent cultural heritage, but we do not require everyone to understand it in depth. Classical Chinese itself has a certain depth and difficulty, and it is impossible for everyone to be able to understand it and appreciate its truth.
Since it is difficult, why can't a small number of people inherit it like classical music and folk dance, instead of asking everyone to do it? I want to distinguish the most basic concepts: learning, appreciation, and edification.
What we do not agree with is the emphasis on classical Chinese in basic education. Rather than opposing the influence of classical Chinese.
I am also exposed to classical Chinese. This is a mentality with two different concepts. One is the tradition of national history and culture accumulated behind me for thousands of years. We can rely on it as a big tree. Rather than a burden that rests on each of our shoulders. Classical Chinese is divorced from our real life, and it is an inevitable trend of the times for vernacular Chinese to replace classical Chinese in primary and secondary school textbooks.
Also, those who hold negative views do not learn classical Chinese! Reason: Classical Chinese is only useful when studying ancient books and has disappeared in daily life, just like our chat here. 3. The original text of 'Four people a person will meet in his life'
The four people a person will meet in his life. The first one is himself, and the second one is your favorite person. The third person you love is the person who loves you the most, and the fourth person is the person you love most. First you will meet the person you love most, and then you will experience the feeling of love; because you understand the feeling of being loved, That's why you can find the person who loves you the most; when you experience loving and being loved, and learn to love, you will know what you need, and you will find the person who is most suitable for you and can be with you for a lifetime.
But sadly, in real life, these three people are usually not the same person; the one you love most often does not choose you; the one who loves you most is often not the one you love most; and the one who lasts the most Yes, it’s not the one you love the most or the one who loves you the most, just the person who appears at the most suitable time. Who will you be in other people's lives? No one intentionally changes his heart. When he loves you, he really loves you, but when he doesn't love you, he really doesn't love you anymore. When he loves you, he can't pretend not to love you; similarly, he There is no way to pretend to love you when I don't love you.
When a person doesn’t love you and wants to leave you, you have to ask yourself if you still love him. If you don’t love him anymore, don’t refuse to leave for the sake of your poor self-esteem; if you still love him If you love him, you should want him to live happily and hope that he can be with the person you truly love, and you will never stop him. If you prevent him from getting true happiness, it means that you no longer love him, and if you don't If you love him, what qualifications do you have to accuse him of changing his heart? Love is not possession. If you like the moon, you cannot take it off and put it in the basin, but the moon's light can still shine into your room. In other words, if you love someone, you can also have it in another way, so that your lover can become an eternal memory in your life. If you really love someone, you must love him for who he is - love him for what he is, and love him for what he is. Bad: Love his advantages as well as his shortcomings. You can never hope that he will become what you want just because you love him. If he doesn't change, you won't love him anymore.
You cannot tell the reason for truly loving someone. You only know that no matter when, where, or in a good or bad mood, you want this person to be with you; true love is when two people can be together in the most difficult times. Zhongxiangshou means that there is no requirement at all.
After all, feelings must be given, not just gained; separation is an inevitable test. If your relationship is not strong enough, you have to admit defeat. True love will not turn into resentment.
What about you? Which one did you find? Who did you meet in the vast sea of ??people? Who met you again? . 4. Looking for four classical Chinese essays from primary schools
Son of Yang:
The son of Yang in Liang was nine years old and very intelligent and helpful. Kong Junping visited his father. When his father was not there, he called his son out. To set the fruit, the fruit has Yangmei. Kong pointed to his son and said: "This is the fruit of your family." The son replied: "I have never heard that the peacock is the master's poultry."
Translation: In the Liang Kingdom, there was a family named Yang. I have a nine-year-old son who is very smart. One day, Kong Junping came to visit his father, but his father was not at home, so Kong Junping called the child out. The boy brought some fruit to Kong Junping, including bayberry. Kong Junping pointed to the myrica rubras with the smiles on his face and said: “This is your home fruit.” The child immediately replied: “I’ve never heard that the peacock is your home bird, sir.”
"Uncle The original text of "Ya Jue Xian" -
Boya was good at drums and harp, and Zhong Ziqi was good at listening. Boya played the harp and played the harp, and his ambition was high in the mountains. Zhong Ziqi said, "How good it is! It's as high as Mount Tai!" His goal was on flowing water. Zhong Ziqi said, "How good it is. It's as tall as a river!" What Boya thought about was what Zhong Ziqi said. You must get it. When Ziqi died, Boya said that there would be no more music in the world. He would break the strings of his harp and never play the drum again for the rest of his life.
Translation
Yu Boya is good at playing the piano, and Zhong Ziqi is good at listening to the piano. When Boya was playing the piano, he thought of expressing mountains. When Zhong Ziqi heard it, he exclaimed: "That's great. , I seem to have seen the majestic Mount Tai!" Boya wanted to express flowing water, and Zhong Ziqi said, "It's great, like an endless river!" No matter what Boya wanted to express, Zhong Ziqi could express it. Accurately express his feelings. After Zhong Ziqi's death, Boya felt that it would be difficult to find anyone in the world who could understand his music, so he broke his beloved piano and stopped playing it for the rest of his life.
Two children arguing with each other. Original text: Confucius was traveling eastward, saw two children arguing, and asked why.
Yi'er said: "I think that when the sun begins to rise, people are close, but when the sun is in the middle, they are far away." "The middle time is close."
Yi'er said: "When the sun rises, it is as big as a car hood. When it reaches the middle of the day, it is like a bowl. A bowl for holding things. The round one is a bowl, and the square one is a bowl." , Isn’t this why the ones who are far away are small and those who are close are big?”
One son said: “It is cool in Cangcang at the beginning of the day, and it is like exploring the soup in the middle of the day. This is not why those who are near are hot and those who are far away are Is it cool? ”
Confucius couldn’t decide. The two children laughed and said, "Who knows more about you?"
Translation: Confucius traveled to the East and saw two children arguing. He went over and asked them what they were arguing about.
A child said: "I think the sun is close to people when it first rises, and it is far away at noon."
(Another) A child said: "I think it is It's far away when the sun first rises, but it's close when it's noon."
Original text
Learning chess
Yi Qiu is a person who is good at chess in the whole country. He asked Yi Qiu to teach two people to play chess. One of them concentrated on the game, but Yi Qiu listened. Although the other listened, he thought that a swan was coming, and he wanted to help him and shot it with his bow. Even though I have learned from him, I am not as good as him. Why is he so wise? Said: Not so.
Translation
Yi Qiu is the best Go player in the country. Let Yi Qiu teach two people how to play Go. One of them was attentive and listened carefully to everything Yi Qiu said, pondering it carefully and comprehending it carefully. The other person was also listening to Yi Qiu's teachings on the surface, but in his heart he thought that the swan was coming and was thinking about how to pull him off. Use your bow and arrow to shoot down the swan. Although they learned Go together, the latter was not as good as the former. Is it because his intelligence is not as good as the former? Answer: Not so.
A child said: "When the sun first rises, it is as big as the roof of a carriage.
By noon, it will be as big as a plate. Isn’t that what is far away (looks like)?
Isn’t that what is far away (looks like)
Small and what is near (looks like) big? "
(Another) A child said: "It's very cool when the sun first comes out. When it's noon (it feels) like entering a bathing pool, isn't it getting closer
(feel) the hotter the farther away (feel) the cooler? "
Confucius could not decide (who was right and who was wrong). Two children laughed at Confucius and said, "Who said you know a lot? ”